PDA

View Full Version : I'm bored, let's fight


NousDefionsDoc
02-20-2004, 16:40
First, let me say that despite my various incarcerations at the hands of an unjust justice system, I have respect for the work done by LEOs. My brother was one for years.

However, I have noticed a trend since 9/11 (it may have been going on before that) for law enforcement personnel to compare themselves to the military, to "borrow" terminology, to use military equipment and weapons, etc. It has reached the point where I, perhaps overly sensitively, seem to detect a chip on the shoulder of many. They appear to be overly justifying the work they do when on joint boards. Without need as far as I'm concerned.

I have heard them call each other and themselves "Operators", their ops "Special Ops", etc. The latest I heard is LESOM (Law Enforcement Special Operations Medic). This is the name some wish to give the paramedics that work with SWAT teams on raids, etc.

I really don't understand this sudden need to paramilitarize law enforcement. I never called myself a SWAT guy. I also think it is very, very dangerous path to go down, especially if it is coming from within.

There is a reason for such laws as Posse Comitatus and many have seen first hand the effects of deviating from a separation of responsibilitites. My personal opinion is that policies such as having FBI personnel overseas is detrimental to their actual mission. There are training missions overseas that I think should be done by LEO, the military in many cases doesn't have the expertise in the subject matter, personal protection comes to mind. (Yes, I know some military personnel have dones it, but its not core business.)

During Operation Promote Liberty (nation building in Panama) we were assigned a reservist from the LA County Sheriff's Department to "assist us". The idea was to convert the PDF into police. We obviously didn't know the first thing about policing skills, so the planned seemd valid.

Now, this young man was a fine citizen. Hispanic decent with decent language skills, years of experience working in the LA County jail. Nice guy too. He also had no lesson plans or any idea of how to do them or a POI, no instructor skills, etc. So he sat around for a month or two while we did the work. I don't blame the individual, he simply didn't have the mind set to do the job.

Another case is the death and wounding of the Robin Sage guys. I don't know all the details, but there is a problem there. We've been working that area non-stop since 1952. There's no excuse.

I rode with my brother on I 10 just out of Houston numerous times. That doesn't qualify me as LEO, but as I said to him, it gives me enough of a basis to make the statement "No way in hell I would ever do things the way they do." In his case, ongoing training was non-existent. Weapons maintenance, non-existent, intelligence - non-existent, language skills in a primarily Hispanic area - non-existent. I know everybody's experiences will be different, and I'm really not generalizing. Just looking for discussion.

Anyway, I just thought I'd throw that out there and see if there were any comments.

ATTICA! ATTICA! :D

pulque
02-20-2004, 17:41
let me say that despite my various incarcerations at the hands of an unjust justice system

?!!? dont tarnish my perfect image of you (unless its a really good story!)

I really don't understand this sudden need to paramilitarize law enforcement.

The previous discussion about defining street gangs as insurgencies was food for thought. I think LEOs do see themselves in a new role these days. For example, Seattle 1999.

Another case is the death and wounding of the Robin Sage guys. I don't know all the details, but there is a problem there. We've been working that area non-stop since 1952. There's no excuse.

TRAGICALLY POOR communication.

ongoing training was non-existent.

true of most civilian professions.

bleh.

Team Sergeant
02-20-2004, 17:57
Originally posted by pulque
[ For example, Seattle 1999.



Refresh my memory. (tell me you're not refering to a man with a sword holding off the entire Seattle PD for an ungodly period of time.)

Team Sergeant

Airbornelawyer
02-20-2004, 18:14
WTO Ministerial meeting in Seattle in 1999. The first big anti-globalization protest bringing together leftists, anarchists and assorted nutcases and agitators. Thousands of protesters, lots of tear gas, and far more organization among the criminal elements in the protesters than in a typical riot.

pulque
02-20-2004, 18:44
Originally posted by Team Sergeant
Refresh my memory. (tell me you're not refering to a man with a sword holding off the entire Seattle PD for an ungodly period of time.)

Team Sergeant

I remember that guy.
No, I'm refering to unruly people without swords.
http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/9951/features-anderson.shtml

Its the whole crowd control thing. It makes civilians nervous. Causes problems. Blurs the lines.

Noslack71
02-20-2004, 19:56
NDD, I tend to agree with you. I was a DC cop for about 5 years after comming back from VN. 2 yrs undercover and part of the assault team when the Hanafi Muslims took over The District Bldg and had about 100 hostages in 1977(Jimmy Carter actually negotiated with them). About 60% of the department were former Army and Marine types with at least one tour in VN. I started out walking a beat in the Ghetto, no radio, 1 SW .38,(18 rnds 158 grain round nose bullets) 1 pair handcuffs, nightstick and a blackjack. Communication was via callboxes on the streetcorners. First thing you learn is not to lock anybody up in the middle of the block, you'll have to fight him all the way to the call box. We were expected to become part of the neighbor hood. Crimes were solved by communication with folks in the neighborhoods. The tendency for cops to become more and more military seems to have begun with the war on drugs and the infusion of Federal aid. In 1977 a group of Hanafi Muslims took over the District Bldg. They held about 100 hostages less than 2 blks from the Whitehouse. During the initial takeover 1 student reporter was killed, 2 cops were wounded, Marion Barry was shot in the chest and my partner grabbed his ankles and rushed him down 2 flights of marble stairs(DC Police got its biggest raise in history following that) to save his life. That vwas the end of the casualties. During the next three days DC police officers with mdl 70, .270's (w/iron sights) , 870 pump shotguns and 6 shot.38 cal revolvers held the terrs at bay in the city council chambers with no further injuries. I think I saw two Uzi's and officers on the outside had sniper rifles w/ telescopic sights. A big part of the success was keeping the FBI out of it.
I think the appearance of overwhelming firepower and the military appearance of SWAT teams etc has reached a point of dimishing returns. The WTO riots you mentioned in Seattle. I live across the ditch from Seattle and it was an abysmal showing by the cops. You might notice that DC has many demonstartions each year. Demonstration routes are planned, at each intersection part of the group is forced down another side street. The crowd is continually broken into smaller and smaller groups with routes that never intersect. This is not rocket science but, it does take planning and patience. It seems the police attitude has changed to more of one of confrontation. The Feds have a hand in this. They will come into town, kick ass, stir up the locals and leave the local cops to clean up the mess. I suspect that after a while it is easier to stay in the confrontation mode. If you go that route, it is better to look like a military unit than a group of cops.
9/11 has given a lot of folks who wannbe Rambo but, still want to go home at night, drink a few beers and chase the wife around the kitchen the opportunity to play dress up without have to absorb the other lessons.

NousDefionsDoc
02-20-2004, 20:11
I would think it would be natural, especially for combat vets, to have some carry over when they went to LEO. The people I'm talking about have never been in the military, and I get the impression they did LEO instead of. I could be wrong about that. They are young guys. I haven't heard females or older guys doing it much. And not so much from the larger cities.

They seem to have GI Joe fever, while they have many fine role models from within the LEO files.

The situation you mentioned in DC would to me be a good case for temp suspending Posse Comitatus. Known terrorist group, etc.

Interesting observations about the neighborhoods and community policing.

Surgicalcric
02-20-2004, 20:38
NDD:

I see alot of the same around where I live/work. There is a large SWAT/CERT team for both the county Sheriffs Dept and the City PD. Most of the guys on the teams, that I have noticed, are not PMS, but are those that chose LE instead, were unable to join or whatever. There is the exception but they are few and far between. The guys here still work a normal shift unlike the ones in large cities where SWAT is their full-time assignment. Nonetheless they are dedicated to their 'Mission' if one arises. The guys are always out PT-ing in the park in the mornings, doing formation runs, singing cadences. There is a small MOUT facility where they do CQC and they are always bragging about this warrant or that bust.

I have worked with them on several occasion and they all have an attitude similar to that of some Regiment guys I know. They think they are the know all end all. And they throw the, 'I'm SWAT' around like its akin to SF, Rangers, Force Recon, SEALS. I have actually talked to a few who believe they are just as good at CQB/MOUT as their military counterpart.

It is quite a strange thing to see.

NousDefionsDoc
02-20-2004, 20:52
Well, I think you have to expect a certain amount of bravado especially amongst youngsters. When I was in the 82nd Airplane Gang, one of our favorite things was to catch a leg walking through the Division area. In the Quiet Professionals, it wouldn't occur to me to even say much to one.

The part I don't understand is why they don't do their own thing instead of trying to be psuedo-military. Make up their own language, etc.

I don't really have a problem with the weapons, I would hate for them to be outgunned. But you can't become an Operator by calling yourself one. And like Noslack said, Storm Trooper gear doesn't facilitate access by the public. This is going to sound bad, but I also don't think you can compare enemies like a lot of them try to do. I know police work, especially in a large city, can be very dangerous. But the FARC, AQ, Abu Sayef are professional terrorists. Scum yes, but professional. And there's a difference to me in busting into Billy Bob's trailer to serve a meth warrant and busting into a hotel in Mog to serve an Executive Order.

Maybe its just me, but I don't see the need for the over compensation. Could be its a wartime thing and they feel left out?

Noslack71
02-20-2004, 21:09
NDD, community policing ifn its done right is somewhat akin to putting an A team in a small vill. You have to be partr of the community to help them. With cops all riding around in cars and dressed up likeninja Turtles, it is difficult to get to know the people you are sworn to help!

Surgicalcric
02-20-2004, 23:02
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
...And there's a difference to me in busting into Billy Bob's trailer to serve a meth warrant and busting into a hotel in Mog to serve an Executive Order.

The FD does not have to be on station for serving an Exec Order but we do for the other. ;)

pulque
02-20-2004, 23:36
Noslack71 wrote:
9/11 has given a lot of folks who wannbe Rambo but, still want to go home at night, drink a few beers and chase the wife around the kitchen the opportunity to play dress up without have to absorb the other lessons.

I know this image isnt supposed to be humorous, so I am sorry. You guys are cracking me up.

Great posts.

NousDefionsDoc
02-20-2004, 23:41
Originally posted by Surgicalcric
The FD does not have to be on station for serving an Exec Order but we do for the other.

Didn't you sign some Army papers? Then quit talking about fire trucks and "we" in the same sentence.

"We" don't need fire trucks because we don't set shit on fire on accident. Its always on purpose.:D

Razor
02-20-2004, 23:53
Originally posted by Surgicalcric
The guys are always out PT-ing in the park in the mornings, doing formation runs, singing cadences.

I'm of the opinion that if you have enough air to sing, you need to run faster.

NousDefionsDoc
02-21-2004, 00:31
Originally posted by Razor
I'm of the opinion that if you have enough air to sing, you need to run faster.

I am in complete agreement with my esteemed colleague from 10th Group.

Tell them to shut up and run really fast.

Surgicalcric
02-21-2004, 06:08
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
Didn't you sign some Army papers? Then quit talking about fire trucks and "we" in the same sentence.

"We" don't need fire trucks because we don't set shit on fire on accident. Its always on purpose.:D

a.) We was referring to Firefighters

b.) On purpose huh...apparently you have never been witness to a meth lab explosion, up close and personal like. Nasty, very nasty.

FWIW, I dont know about the protocols elsewhere, other than CFD and FDNY, but whenever the PD or SO here serves a warrant at a meth lab EMS, FD and HAZMAT are all present.

Thats all neither here or there though. Back to subject of discussion. I have no idea why they feel the need to call themsleves "operators." I laugh and joke about it here at the station all the time and it has gotten me into some deep crap before with a few of them. They get over it though.

Sacamuelas
02-21-2004, 10:15
Originally posted by Noslack71, surgcric and NDD
9/11 has given a lot of folks who wannabe Rambo but, still want to go home at night, drink a few beers and chase the wife around the kitchen the opportunity to play dress up without have to absorb the other lessons.

I have no idea why they feel the need to call themselves "operators." I laugh and joke about it here at the station all the time and it has gotten me into some deep crap before with a few of them.

Tell them to shut upand run really fast.


Alright NDD, you said you wanted to fight and it looks like everyone is going to get on your "team" so I will play the other side. My group will be called the STFU (Serious Trouble Friggin Understanding U) :D


STFU feels these comments show us that there is a little deficiency in the prevalence of "quiet professionals" in the military. IF you are confident in your skills, training, and unit's special capabilities then why do you feel the need to take offense to someone using the term "operator"? It can be viewed as quite juvenile and unprofessional for educated, trained, and truly experienced men to care about whether one group or another is referred to in conversation.

Operator is not SF specific. It has been a "cool" guy word that has been used to describe some of the best soldiers in the world, but it also has other more general descriptive tones in non-military circles. FWIW- the SF command did NOT create the term for the exclusive use to describe SOF qualified personnel. If anything, it was first commonly used to describe a woman connecting phone lines to connect the desired party to their location. We have no idea why a SF soldier would defend this words usage so strictly. It really makes the leadership of STFU disappointed to hear gonna-be's, wanna-be's and especially the has beens/real deals discuss how important it is to them that no one else is called "operators".

First off, until the candidates prove themselves through to the end, they are much closer to wannabe Rambos than someone who simply "chases his wife around" or serves on a SWAT team. Let me say, we have no doubts as to James chances in becoming an exceptional SF soldier. This isn't a shot at him... We think the guy is top notch and should have the highest chances of making it due to his professionalism and dedication. However, it still makes us disturbed to hear how threatened it makes people feel when someone takes one of the non unit specific cool-by-association terms and uses it for another purpose/group.

Remember, you are doing your profession (SF soldiers) for the right reasons (not to be Rambo or call yourself cool terms) and at the highest level of any organization. You have the best training of any group in the world. That makes you comparable to no group, foreign or domestic, in the skill sets you have learned/trained/mastered. Why demean yourself by taking offense to other groups that are trained/selected/utilized for a totally different role? They still have demands for unit integrity and therefore the use of "special" names. We would like to think a SF soldier is a LOT more than just an operator.

We are more impressed by a soldier that simply nods, maybe smirks, and then moves on to what is important for him in the real world. At the most, we would expect a short "it's not the same, but it really doesn't matter to me" type statement. We can't imagine the TS or Reaper getting into a petty quarrel over someone using the term operator UNLESS he or his group was trying to insinuate they were a SF soldier. However, this thread is not addressing SF posers, it is focused on SWAT or other domestic LE type units that call themselves "operators".
In our opinion, they have every right to call themselves operators and it is completely legitimate to do so .
Show me in this MW dictionary definition where a SF soldier has a legitimate need/right to be defensive of this term. :

1A : one that operates : as a : one that operates a machine or device b : one that operates a business c : one that performs surgical operations d : one that deals in stocks or commodities
2 a : MOUNTEBANK, FRAUD b : a shrewd and skillful person who knows how to circumvent restrictions or difficulties
3 a : something and especially a symbol that denotes or performs a mathematical or logical operation b : a mathematical function
4 : a binding site in a DNA chain at which a genetic repressor binds to inhibit the initiation of transcription of messenger RNA by one or more nearby structural genes -- called also operator gene; compare OPERON

We agree with NDD's last sentence in the above quote. We think it goes for the offended and our new charity cause SWI. (soldiers with insecurities) though.

Signed-
The Supreme commander of STFU
Sacamuelas (defender of the other side, devil's advocate, non-cop, admitted and proud wife chaser, and certified wish-I-was pistol marksman)

Alright, lets hear the flames...LOL

brownapple
02-21-2004, 10:56
Originally posted by Sacamuelas
We would like to think a SF soldier is a LOT more than just an operator.

Well, I have to admit....I've been an operator. Military switchboard. When I was a cadet. And let me tell you... I was OK at it... well, I didn't suck too much. So, I figure that I've got the operator thing down pat... but still haven't figured out how to do the Peace Corps hippy thing. Maybe NDD can teach me. :D

NousDefionsDoc
02-21-2004, 13:10
Operator is not SF specific.
It is Special Operations specific in this context.
FWIW- the SF command did NOT create the term for the exclusive use to describe SOF qualified personnel.
Yes we did, in this context. Although not to describe all SOF personnel, only certain ones.
We would like to think a SF soldier is a LOT more than just an operator.
There is nothing more in my world than an Operator. An Operator is the epitome of the SF soldier.
one that performs surgical operations
Thank you for proving my point.

None of what you have said addresses the question of the Law Enforcement Special Operations Medic in the first post.

While STFU is focusing on what it percieves to be my petty complaint over the use of the word, I will attempt to further explain myself.

I, unlike STFU, believe language is important. I have learned over the years that if one listens closely, it is possible to determine intent from language. Language is the externalization of the internal thought process.

What concerns me is not the inappropriate use of one or two or ten words. What concerns me is the militarization of law enforcement. When you factor in the use of military terms to describe themselves, use of privately purchased military equipment, deployment of FBI Agents around the world when they can't handle their own agent reports at home, events such as Waco and Ruby Ridge, the Patriot Acts, etc., where you see me being petty, I see a trend.

Let's reverse the trend. Would you be indifferent if military personnel started referring to themselves as deputies? - its just a word. How about we put MILGATS in every major police department in the US? Soldiers wearing handcuffs and nightsticks? Badges? LEOs shouldn't be upset, that would be petty. They should quietly smirk.

No doctor, there is a reason why things are the way they are. There is a line that separates and for good reason. Now, at the time when everyone in government wants to "do something" to protect the homeland is in my opinion the time when the line must be most defined. Otherwise we run the risk of creating a police state because of just a word.

Police must understand very clearly what their duties and limitations are, just as soldiers must. And it begins, IMO, with language.

There is a reason for Posse Comitatus - a very good reason. But is a police state created by a militarized police force any less of a police state than one created by the military taking control of law enforcement functions?

You have heard Noslack's opinion on what this militarization does to good police work.

You may not think language matters. I think it matters a great deal. A guerrilla talks like a guerrilla for a reason. As does a soldier or a law enforcement officer.

So you see Doctor, you do me a disservice by thinking it is only a petty matter of a word. I thought you knew me a little better.


Oh and one last thing: If they want to be called operators, they can go to the fookin' school and suffer the hardships like Operators. They can dissolve their unions and associations and accept whatever pay the POTUS of the day wants to give them. They can deploy en masse on 20 December without knowing when they will be home. They can be moved in accordance with the needs of the department to whatever crappy assignment the department requires without consideration for needs of the family. They can go to 'Stan and fight terrorists only to come home and mop floors. Because "While you might have a Silver Star, you're still a PFC, so get the mop."

Yes, we make that choice. But I think that gives us the right to reserve a word or two if we choose to do so. I choose "Quiet Professional" "Operator" "Good in the woods" "Green Hat" "SF" and "Green Beret". They can have the other 5 billion trillion million words in the English language. And I'll even share some of my words with the other US Spec Ops troops and some foriegners if they're really good.

Deal?

Sacamuelas
02-22-2004, 13:10
Alright, It looks like STFU has found an audience. I must be pretty good at this. I think we as a group must fall somewhere near PETA in NDD's mind after that response. LOL

No need to call me that doctor word, it sounds so bad when you say it like that. LOL Don't make it personal, you specifically asked for a fight and noone seemed willing to have any fun. I was giving you what you wanted. Everyone is way to scared to argue with you with God powers and all. Let me reread your post and consult with my STFU cabinet members. I will respond ASAP.

Damn NDD... your touchy when the website goes down for 24 hours. LOL

GH- glad you saw some of the humor in my post.

signed- (per NDDs agreement in his last post)
SC of STFU
Sacamuelas ( aka a highly trained/educated "operator" that routinely works in multiple "operator"ies while completing several different objectives, and one who routinely performs detailed surgical "operations" during this work)

Surgicalcric
02-22-2004, 13:48
Originally posted by Sacamuelas
...First off, until the candidates prove themselves through to the end, they are much closer to wannabe Rambos than someone who simply "chases his wife around" or serves on a SWAT team. Let me say, we have no doubts as to James chances in becoming an exceptional SF soldier. This isn't a shot at him... We think the guy is top notch and should have the highest chances of making it due to his professionalism and dedication. However, it still makes us disturbed to hear how threatened it makes people feel when someone takes one of the non unit specific cool-by-association terms and uses it for another purpose/group.

Alright...

For me its a serious attitude problem with them. They think they are much more than I, and many others, see them to be. They are LEO with a few skills more than patrol officers and a crap load of cool go-fast gear. Atleast here thats the way it works.

The medics are EMS paramedics who have been to either the CONTOMS course or the H&K course. They are not LEO who have been sent to medic school. Special Operations Medics (18-D, 91WF1, Seal Corpmen, TF-160 medics) training includes so much more than that of a SWAT Medic, therefor they should not share a common name that has been associated with the military.

I do not think myself anymore than a Smoke-Eater. I find the idea incredulous that you even think I see myself as more than a 'candidate.' I am fully aware of my place. Just because I am not an 'operator' does not preclude me from having an opinion about what their name means in the grande scheme of things.

Sacamuelas
02-22-2004, 14:09
James... Glad to have you jump back in. I expressed my specific opinion about you in my post. No need to feel attacked. I was just putting out another opinion that I have seen expressed on socnet and other boards. I thought your words were actually understated and self deprecating as to your future training and your current training level, and very professional I'll add... at the worst view my post as simply "pulling your chain".

If you wish, wait until the end of this thread and you will see how I personally feel about this issue. Until then, I have to keep my STFU brothers represented since there are no SWAT guys with attitudes similar to what NDD has described stepping up to argue their legitimacy.

NousDefionsDoc
02-22-2004, 15:45
I'm not taking it personal. And I would never take advantage of position in a discussion. Same same rules apply to me as they do everybody else when posting as far as I'm concerned. The TS is the power, I'm just the tip of the spear. LOL

Besides, I can kick your ass on this topic without the powers.:D

Smokin Joe
02-22-2004, 15:47
Here is my point of view from and LEO stand point...

NDD your right there is a lot of Officers out there that are on a SWAT team or think they should be on a SWAT team that have an inferority complex when it comes to the mil specifically SF type units. Granted none of these individual Officers will admit it, but I know these officers personally and can tell you that they wish they were running around the hills of A-stan shooting bad guys. However, at the same time these Officers will not make a personal sacrafice and join the military specifically an SF unit. The officers I know who do not have an inferiority complex who want to run around the hills of A-stan killing bad guys have quit the department and signed on the dotted line, and are now in the SF pipleine.

On a certain level I'm one of these Officers. I enjoy the "IDEA" of running around A-stan and shooting bad guys. But I know that dreams and reality are two totally different animals. I have a great life, I work mon-fri 7-5 with weekends off so I can chase the wife around the house. I don't have to stand on a hill at 10 thousand + feet elevation freezing my ass off wondering if I'm gonna catch a mortar today or not. Do I feel inferior to military or SF types like yourself? No, but I do admire what you and your brothers do, I know that I couldn't do it.

Back on topic.
These officers or SWAT type units who go around naming themselves "Operators" or "Special Operations Units" yada yada yada. Are on one hand wanna be SF types or SOF types but on the other hand are SF types (literal translation) they are the best from the LEO community (alteast we hope they are), they do have specialized training, of dynamic room entry, and some other needed skills. BUT they (as you know) are not by anyway shape or form on the same level as an SF soldier. Can these same officers kick ass and take names outside an urban enviornment? NOPE. Some can't even kick ass and take names in an urban enviornment.

The individuals I know who run around throwing out that they are on the SWAT team are the same individuals who do not make it on the SWAT team b/c of there bravado. They have the inablity to work to on a team. They are the same loud mouth guys that brag about everything they have done in life, you know the friggin idiot who won't shut up about how great he is...The empty can makes a lot of noise.

As far as equipment goes I now you don't have a problem with the weapons but daily uniforms I think we should wear polo type shirts with BDU bottoms. Why? b/c they are comfortable. I do not think agencies should be wearing woodland or desert BDU's for there normal uniform but I do think they should wear them if they are going to do a raid or something along those lines, b/c if someone gets away and it becomes a fugitive hunt you are already dressed for the occasion.

Like Noslack71 stated community policing is getting inside the community and getting to know people, using your inner personal communication to build rapport with as many people in the community as you can. It works for us, the problem in bigger cities is 3 fold 1. Officers have little time or training for community policing. 2. Agencies do not have officers working the same neighborhoods day in day out year after year. 3. Younger officers (my generation 21-33) have little patience for community policing they don't give a damn about the community they just want the next addernaline rush, or to bullshit with there buddies.

Okay last but not least entire Agencies are to fault for alot of your gripps 1. for allowing there SWAT teams to be called "Spec Ops whatever" or for the officers to be called an "Operator" 2. As for continuation training goes that falls squarely on the administrations shoulders and there inability to offer continuation training. Cops love training but you have provide it, to make it interesting, and worth there time.

And don't even get me started on the FBI.

Noslack71
02-22-2004, 16:06
Has the level of viloence in the US increased or decreased with the creation of more SWAT teams carrying MP5's and other high speed,low drag gear? At one time, a beat cop was the best job in American law enforcement. The cop knew evryone on his beat,we always left a bookie, a bootlegger/pot dealer and a hooker more or less alone. They were great sources of information. We knew who the bad guys were, what there MO's were and someone usually told us if they made a score or, were planning something. We went to bat for the folks on the beat and when we were getting our ass kicked in the middle of the block someone called 911 or came out and helped us. People use to call operators to get a cop or firefighter to help them. I never heard the term used in relation to an SF soldier until the mid 80's. Seems to me that became the in term among the Brits. Why oh why our SOF community would copy anything from the Brits is beyond my humble pay grade.
The orginial question is does this militarization of emergency services help America? My vote is No! It only separates the people from the cops. Remember Mao, the guerilla swims in the sea of the people. Most criminal activity(except sex crimes) by nature are guerilla activities.SWAT has great intentions but, its very nature and logistics requires maintaining distance from the community. That seems like adding more and more conventional forces to fight the "G" in VN.

Roguish Lawyer
02-22-2004, 16:15
What brought this on, NDD? Have you been jailed recently? :D

Surgicalcric
02-22-2004, 16:17
Originally posted by Noslack71
...SWAT has great intentions but, its very nature and logistics requires maintaining distance from the community. That seems like adding more and more conventional forces to fight the "G" in VN.

I would guess this is the reason the larger departments such as LAPD, LASO, NYPD, CPD, etc... have dedicated SWAT teams. This keeps the teams concentrated on training and operations instead of using patrol officers to fill both functions.

The Reaper
02-22-2004, 16:29
I, for one, understand Posse Comitatus and do not want to see the US Army involved in attacking US citizens here at home.

The militarization of local LE is a big mistake. When the only tool you have is a hammer, all problems tend to look like nails.

RL, have liberal aliens taken over your thoughts, or are you in some kind of trial funk?

TR

NousDefionsDoc
02-22-2004, 16:37
Originally posted by Roguish Lawyer
What brought this on, NDD? Have you been jailed recently? :D

Did I leave a message on your answering machine? LOL

Smokin' Joe, that's all I'm saying. I know a lot of experienced LEOs that aren't like what I'm describing. They are very professional. I'm talking mostly about the younger guys and from what I've seen, they're mostly from mid-sized cities.

Roguish Lawyer
02-22-2004, 16:44
Originally posted by The Reaper
RL, have liberal aliens taken over your thoughts, or are you in some kind of trial funk?

ROTFLMAO!

Seriously, I'm totally in favor of eliminating many protections for criminal defendants, but there is a line I won't cross. I worked for a senior Reagan administration official who was indicated in the Wedtech scandal. He was convicted by a DC jury -- hardly of his peers -- and lost just about everything in the process of getting the conviction reversed by the DC Circuit. It was a BS case brought by a far-left special prosecutor who was out to get this guy because he was close to Reagan.

Let's not forget what you guys are fighting for. Rights for criminal defendants are part of it, even if there have been some decisions that have gone too far. And Padilla should fry too.

CRad
02-23-2004, 14:09
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc


I, unlike STFU, believe language is important. I have learned over the years that if one listens closely, it is possible to determine intent from language. Language is the externalization of the internal thought process.

What concerns me is not the inappropriate use of one or two or ten words. What concerns me is the militarization of law enforcement. When you factor in the use of military terms to describe themselves, use of privately purchased military equipment, deployment of FBI Agents around the world when they can't handle their own agent reports at home, events such as Waco and Ruby Ridge, the Patriot Acts, etc., where you see me being petty, I see a trend.



NDD is making good sense and a really good point. However, could it be that LEO see themselves as the first line of defense against terrorists both foreign and domestic. I believe it's easy for police officers to get caught up in a seige mentality, and no wonder - their fellow countrymen are the ones who present the greatest dangers to them.

I can see why SWAT Squad is a better name than the Tinkerbell Team, but when you come right down to it does it matter as long as the job gets done. Are SWAT guys operators in the military sense of the word? Is the Rapid Deployment Force made up of operators? Would Special Forces still be special if they were called, oh maybe (howler monkeys;))Unique Teams.

Noslack71
02-23-2004, 15:11
One of the most interesting parts of the hanafi incident was watching our bosses tell the FBI to piss off. We were two blks from the Feebs HQS and they were literally standing on our perimeter with all of their HRT team gear. We (the DC police) would not let them play. I think that had a lot to do with a peaceful outcome. The Feds feel no accountability to local neighborhoods. I have always been leery of getting federal funds into SWAT. Once you take the money, they tend to call the tune that is best for Wash DC not the locality. We had an incident up here not to long ago. A Camboadian immigrant in his 50's got into it with local cops. Next thing he's surrounded by guys in you cant see me rags with automatic weapons. The camboadian ends up dead and the cops shot another cop. Does anyone think that Camboadian may have flashed to an earlier time in his life. Found out later he had worked with US forces fighting Communists. That is the kind of info a beat cop would have known. In our rush to standardize a show force it seems that people are expecting a big SWAT presence and are preparing for it. The level of violence with just continue to increase here at home until someone is smart enough to ratchet things down and take a few breaths.
Oh and by the way RL I sat in front of a couple of DC juries and if it were not for a couple of smart judges I probably would be sharing a cell with NDD.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 15:16
Just saw this one reference buzz words for operations:

Blue - Law Enforcement
Green - Military
Blue-green - Military peacekeeping
Green-blue - Rural/Narcotics Law Enforcement (erradication?)
In recent years the colors blur together

I'm disappointed that magenta, Psy War's favorite color, hasn't been included yet. I think there is some discrimination against peach as well. I always liked the color peach.

pulque
03-07-2004, 16:12
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
Just saw this one reference buzz words for operations:

Blue - Law Enforcement
Green - Military
Blue-green - Military peacekeeping
Green-blue - Rural/Narcotics Law Enforcement (erradication?)
In recent years the colors blur together

I'm disappointed that magenta, Psy War's favorite color, hasn't been included yet. I think there is some discrimination against peach as well. I always liked the color peach.

eye receptor cones have absorption peaks near 565 nm (red), 535 nm (green) and 445 nm (blue).

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 17:04
I'm late to the party......

NDD, in your first post you mentioned

"Another case is the death and wounding of the Robin Sage guys. I don't know all the details, but there is a problem there. We've been working that area non-stop since 1952. There's no excuse."

From what I read on this it was a tragic event caused by the lack of common sense on the trainee's fault. (Attempting to conceal weapons and then attempting a gun grab of the officer.) Lack of communication between the department and the military didn't help either.

Not trying to stir old wounds. NDD, are you privy to info on this situation that I am not? And from your post you believe this situation to be the fault of the LEO's?

Would you like to discuss this here or in a new thread? Any other questions you might have for someone with "coperator" experience? :D


Surgicalcric-

I don't really know you, so forgive me if I've taken some of your posts the wrong way. I detect a definite anti-leo slant to a number of your posts. This really isn't too surprising, you being a firefighter and all.

In this post here-
I have worked with them on several occasion and they all have an attitude similar to that of some Regiment guys I know. They think they are the know all end all.

What Regiment are you referring to?

Kinda seems like a condescending, ignorant statement from someone with your limited military background, but what do I know? Just another dumb ex-cop/Ragnar guy.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 17:21
Sure, we can discuss it here.

What I am saying is that this is not a heavily populated area. But what population there is sees Ft. Bragg as the focal point. In those hills, people have been supporting and participating in those exercises for years.

The SWC guys know a lot of them by name and go deer hunting, etc. Its not like its Seattle or NYC.

So when you are in that area. and see young males in good shape with short hair, the first thing you should think is "Robin Sage". Not terrorism, not drug dealers, not anything else.

Now I'm not saying you assume that and approach with out caution. What I am saying is you approach ensuring they understand you are not part of the play of the problem.

Yes, there was probably a comms mistake. But it didn't have to end in the deaths of two soldiers. I don't know anything other than what was reported in the press, but this isn't the first time this has happened.

I can't remember a soldier ever shooting an LEO, its probably happened, but I don't remember it.

What I'm saying is like others have said, they don't know their surroundings or their situation. And people are getting killed because of it.

What I'm saying is, you don't look for zebras in a horse corral in Montana. If you're in Hoffman and it looks like a soldier and acts like a soldier - its probably a soldier. not an Islamic terrorist.

Edit to add - if you'll read my post, I don't not blame the LEO. I don't know who is at fault. I said "There's no excuse and there's a problem." You don't agree or just assumed I was cop bashing?

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 17:39
NDD,

I don't know all the specifics, and having never been there, I don't have the insight that you do on it. I see what you are saying, and I also agree that it was a very sad, tragic outcome.

For the sake of discussion, I could speculate that possibly the Deputy thought the two were white supremacists?

Here's the CNN article I found.

cnn (http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/02/24/soldier.killed/)

I found this last part disturbing.

Moore County authorities were not scheduled to be part of Saturday's exercise, Kolb said.

"Moore County has never participated in such an exercise and was never told of any such training scenarios," the sheriff's department statement said. "This is a tragic incident ,and our heart-felt prayers go out to the families of all involved."

If this is true, it's pretty sad the lack of communication.


Without divulging opsec, are you or anyone else at liberty to discuss what instructions Robin Sage trainees are given in regards to LE contact while on exercises?

I know in the two JTF-6 missions I did, we were told that all local LE agencies had been notified of our presence. But we were also instructed to comply with the instructions of any leo to the letter.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 17:48
Officials at Fort Bragg said Robin Sage has a 30-year history in central North Carolina and a tradition of involvement with the civilian community. All candidates for the Green Berets must participate in the 38-day exercise, an unconventional warfare scenario set in the fictional country of Pineland.

Local civilians are enlisted in role-playing, as are non-special operations soldiers from the U.S. Army base. All ammunition used in the exercise is blank, Army officials said, adding there was no safety risk to civilians or their property.

from your article.

Two studs in an unmarked car in Robbins, North Carolina. Think he ran the plates before he pulled them over? Probably a rental on a government card.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 17:51
Butler was unaware the exercise was underway, while the soldiers believed the deputy was part of the training exercise, according to the sheriff's department statement.


This is what I'm talking about, right here. If I'm this deputy, there's no way in hell I'm not going to know about a scheduled exercise involving dozens of guys with M16s running around in my county. If the Army didn't tell the locals, maybe they should have. But this guy didn't make an effort to find out either.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 17:55
This is the same article I saw. It doesn't give nearly enough information to find out what happened.

Unfortunately, just like the case of a guy in my company, we'll never know but one side of the story, becuase the other side doesn't have any witnesses.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 17:58
NDD-

Two studs in an unmarked car in Robbins, North Carolina. Think he ran the plates before he pulled them over? Probably a rental on a government card.

No way of finding that out just from a license check. It *might* show up as a rental company that you recognize, might not.


For your second post,

"If I'm this deputy, there's no way in hell I'm not going to know about a scheduled exercise involving dozens of guys with M16s running around in my county. If the Army didn't tell the locals, maybe they should have. But this guy didn't make an effort to find out either."

I defer to the article-

"Moore County has never participated in such an exercise and was never told of any such training scenarios," the sheriff's department statement said. "This is a tragic incident ,and our heart-felt prayers go out to the families of all involved."

I'm not so sure that this statement is true. The statement implies that they never had any knowledge of any training exercises.

If it's as rural as what you say, it's definitely possible for a deputy not to know about exercises going on.

At Ft. Lewis, I know that the Roy and Yelm city cops aren't told everytime soldiers are running around the woods near there cities. But then again, soldiers at lewis almost always wear BDU's.

NDD, what was the protocol for the Robin Sage trainees if they ran into LE?

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 18:00
Slow down NDD, quit chewing the cocoa-I mean coffee beans...:D

Surgicalcric
03-07-2004, 18:02
Originally posted by woobie master
Surgicalcric-

I don't really know you, so forgive me if I've taken some of your posts the wrong way. I detect a definite anti-leo slant to a number of your posts. This really isn't too surprising, you being a firefighter and all.

What Regiment are you referring to?

Kinda seems like a condescending, ignorant statement from someone with your limited military background, but what do I know? Just another dumb ex-cop/Ragnar guy.

You may want to calibrate that detection device of yours as I believe you are reading something into what I have posted. To help you better understand I will clarify.

1.) I am anything but anti-LEO. The comments you have quoted were about SWAT operators, not LEO in general. I also stated the problems were related to those I have worked with.

2.) Ranger Regiment...Is there any other? :D

3.) Again made the comment in context to those I know and it was not a blanket statement. The SWAT guys here have an attitude similar to that of a few of the Regiment guys I know.

My lack of experience in the military does not preclude me from detecting common attitudes among former members of military units or select LEO units and drawing the conclusion they are similar. You would not have to be a firefighter to make an observation that select firefighters are lazy, fat-asses yet believe they are God's gift to the fire service. I stand by my statements.


I hope this clears it up for you.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 18:14
I don't know what they do now, when I went through, it was all rural. We avoided the cops like any other civilian and didn't have vehicles. Obviously something has changed.

The only thing obvious to me is that there was no communication.

The part that I don't like is the "chip". I don't understand why current and former LEOs think everybody is picking on them all the time. Not all, but most I have seen on here and SOCNET. If I wanted to pick on LEOs, I would go over to one of their boards and do it.

I'm also a little tired of the concept that LEOs are above question. Soldiers certainly aren't. I have yet to see anybody try to justify NDs resulting in death, the sale of classified information, that terrorist that threw the hand grenades in the tent, etc. When a soldier gets in trouble with the law for major things like murder, etc., other soldiers don't make excuses for him.

Even in this article, you don't see the Army making excuses, but the Sheriff's Department certainly is. IMO, and that's all it is, they're not telling the full story. But there's no way to know is there? Its his word against two dead guys.

This deputy is really good with a gun though. Rural guy in a small town with probably minimal training manages to fight off a Special Forces soldier in H2H and shoot him, then shoot another before he can get to a weapon?

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 18:21
Look, like I said before. I have a lot of respect for the LEO community. And I imagine most of the problems are caused by administration rather than the officer in the street.

All this goes back to poor hiring policies, low pay, piss poor training, and an attitude. There are undoubtely thousands of very professional LEOs making sacrifices to keep the streets as safe as possible. But there are also those 20 year-old wannabes riding around looking for trouble.

Why is it so hard to admit that when you give a kid a gun, a car with lights on it, and pretty much carte blanche from prosecution for all but the most serious crimes, there's going to be considerable abuse?

CRad
03-07-2004, 18:22
I wouldn't post the whole article except it's from the archives for the Fayetteville paper and you have to be a subscriber to use those.

Lt Tomeny lived down the street and around the corner from me.

Lawsuit filed in Robin Sage death

By Todd Leskanic

Staff writer

A Moore County sheriff’s deputy who shot two Army soldiers -- killing one -- during a military training exercise in 2002 is being sued in federal court.
The lawsuit says Deputy Randall Butler stopped the soldiers’ vehicle without cause and used deadly force without provocation. Sheriff Lane Carter and the Moore County Sheriff’s Office also are named as defendants.

Butler shot Sgt. Stephen Phelps and 1st Lt. Tallas Tomeny on Feb. 23, 2002. Phelps has recovered and is a plaintiff in the lawsuit. Tomeny died. He was 31. His father, Cody Hastings Massasoit, is representing Tomeny’s estate and is named as a plaintiff.

Phelps and Tomeny were engaged in a field exercise known as Robin Sage when they were shot. Robin Sage is a role-playing field exercise that is part of the training for Special Forces soldiers. It takes place in the Uwharrie National Forest and the 10 surrounding counties.

On the day of the shooting, Phelps and Tomeny were riding in the back of a pickup on Acorn Ridge Road near Robbins. Charles Lieber, a civilian participant in the exercise, was driving the truck. Butler reportedly stopped the truck because he believed the men were behaving suspiciously.

Sheriff’s officials have said Butler saw that the soldiers had weapons and believed his life was in danger. The soldiers, thinking Butler was a participant in the exercise, tried to attack him. Butler fired, killing Tomeny and wounding Phelps.

The lawsuit recounts the events surrounding the shooting differently.

It contends that Butler had no probable cause to stop the truck and that he drew his handgun without provocation. The lawsuit also says Butler sprayed Tomeny with pepper spray without provocation and then shot him. He then shot Phelps for no reason, the suit says.

“They really did nothing to provoke the deputy such that he had justification for using deadly force,’’ said C. Scott Holmes, a lawyer for the plaintiffs. “I think that has really been lost in the mix of all this.”

The complaint also charges that the sheriff and the Sheriff’s Office failed to inform and instruct deputies about the exercise.

Carter, who is now the sheriff, was the chief deputy at the time of the shooting. He said Tuesday that the lawsuit has no merits. He said deputies with the department would have had no reason to know about the Robin Sage exercise.

“I’m not familiar with the code words and all that stuff,’’ he said. “We wouldn’t know it because we didn’t participate in those type scenarios and never had.”

Civilian investigators concluded that the shooting was a misunderstanding. Butler was not charged. He has worked for the Sheriff’s Office for four years and has been a law officer for about 18 years, Carter said.

“He was defending his life, that’s what he thought he was doing,’’ Carter said. “That ain’t never going to change. It’s just a lawyer tactic and an effort to get money from government. It’s not unusual for us to get sued when a life is lost in an incident whether we were right or wrong.”

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 18:27
And now its starting to come out. Thanks CRad. It will be interesting to see what the civilian driving the truck has to say.

This is more in line with when I went through. It wasn't unheard of to get a ride every now and then.

CRad
03-07-2004, 18:32
The deputy has said repeatedly that he stopped the truck because it was strange to see two men in the back that time of year.

Maybe he thought they were hunters without licences. That has been known to happen a time or two. Hunting out of season and without a license that is.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 18:35
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
And now its starting to come out. Thanks CRad. It will be interesting to see what the civilian driving the truck has to say.

This is more in line with when I went through. It wasn't unheard of to get a ride every now and then.

NDD, I don't see how the posted article makes it an open and shut case for you.

Lawsuits charge all kinds of crap. We will see what the end result is.

I believe it to be a "Sneaky SF" kind of tactic to deflect questions, and post repeatedly as to put your oponent off guard! I'm onto you now! :D

I'll get back to your other post in a second.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 18:36
The deputy has said repeatedly that he stopped the truck because it was strange to see two men in the back that time of year.

Is this probable cause? or maybe "leeway":D

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 18:39
Originally posted by woobie master
NDD, I don't see how the posted article makes it an open and shut case for you.

Lawsuits charge all kinds of crap. We will see what the end result is.

I believe it to be a "Sneaky SF" kind of tactic to deflect questions, and post repeatedly as to put your oponent off guard! I'm onto you now! :D

I'll get back to your other post in a second.

Oh, I agree 100%. No way is it an open and shut case nor does it even discard what the deputy said. He could very well be telling the truth.

What I meant was I thought the witnesses were dead and now we know they are not and they are talking. That's all. Its still going to be his word against theirs, but at least now we will have their word.

The Reaper
03-07-2004, 18:40
Originally posted by woobie master
I'm late to the party......

NDD, in your first post you mentioned

"Another case is the death and wounding of the Robin Sage guys. I don't know all the details, but there is a problem there. We've been working that area non-stop since 1952. There's no excuse."

From what I read on this it was a tragic event caused by the lack of common sense on the trainee's fault. (Attempting to conceal weapons and then attempting a gun grab of the officer.) Lack of communication between the department and the military didn't help either.

Not trying to stir old wounds. NDD, are you privy to info on this situation that I am not? And from your post you believe this situation to be the fault of the LEO's?

Would you like to discuss this here or in a new thread? Any other questions you might have for someone with "coperator" experience? :D



Not going to open the whole can of worms here, but you are misinformed based on false stories the Moore County Sheriff's Office fed the media immediately after the incident.

You also are not familiar with the Robin Sage scenario or exercise procedures. Your assumptions are wrong.

NDD was right.

This exercise has been going on from 4-6 times per year for over 40 years. All LE agencies in the area were notified that the exercise was going on, and to be alert for military personnel in the area. They normally receive specific notification prior to any activity likely to alarm the public, such as assaults on targets, aircraft operations, etc. They were not specifically told that two soldiers would be moving for a recon from A to B in a civilian vehicle, nor were they normally.

The Deputy pulled over a pick-up with three white males, two of miliatry age, grooming, and bearing, during a time when he knew the exercise was ongoing, and had been notified of that. He also had a history of officer involved shootings.

He questioned the driver (a role player) and segregated him in the car. The other two were separated, but not restrained. The LT he spoke with tried to bribe him with Robin Sage exercise money, then offered him MREs. He was wearing a brown t-shirt with "1LT Tomeny" stencilled on the front of it, jungle boots, and had an ALICE pack.

When asked to open the pack, the 1LT, who was standing by the shoulder of the road, avoided compliance, then complied, and the officer saw a broken down M-4. He didn't attempt to conceal the M-4, it was in the ruck when he was stopped. There is not other way to conceal the M-4 without making it even worse. An M-4 upper separated from a lower is not likely to be a threat for several seconds, even if hostile intent is shown. The SSG was sitting in the back of the pick-up. The deputy told the LT to give him the weapon, then the incident went down. A gun grab was never made, IMHO.

The LT allegedly ordered the SSG to get the ruck to keep control of the issued weapon. It appears that the officer drew his pepper spray, grabbed the ruck, OCed the LT, then shot him and the SSG multiple times, with wound patterns inconsistent with the deputy's story.

Why was he not SA enough to see what was going on with Robin Sage students?
Why not cuff them, or at least search and segregate them?
Why not wait for back-up? Were they going somewhere?
Why escalate to deadly force from the OC so quickly?
Why shoot the SSG multiple times when he was not an immediate threat?
Why did the in car video end after the stop, but before the shooting?

The deputy was wrong on almost all counts, and his actions failed to comply with departmental policy, or common sense. He did get another notch on his gun, though.

The students stayed in role when they should not have. They failed to eventually ID themselves to the officer. They attempted to secure the disassembled M-4 after they should have seen the officer becoming agitated, but they thought he was in on the game and they were being evaluated. 1LT Tomeny died, and SSG P was seriously wounded, but was allowed to graduate and IIRC, is currently serving.

The military now notifies the departments of ALL student activity, and provides liaisons. Suudents are also briefed not to interact with LEOs unless controllers are present and they have been briefed that the scenario is in place.

The SO eventually had to retract or clarify several statements they made, and executed a typical small town cover-up. The SBI, who investigated, refused to indict the officer. Not sure if they have changed their procedures or not, since I believe they were not followed.

The community out here took care of the soldiers families, with the local Chamber of Commerce providing hotel rooms for them to come be near the surviving soldier during his hospitalization, offering condolences to all, and showing support for soldiers in particular.

I live in the area, and was here when it happened. Now you have the rest of the story, as I have gathered it.

TR

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 18:43
:munchin

CRad
03-07-2004, 18:44
He stopped them and didn't like the answers he got from the driver who was a civilian. If I'm not mistaken Staff Sgt Phelps account is somewhat dfferent than Deputy Butler's. At point they tried to bribe Butler with Pineland money.

Here's an article on it -



Tape reveals deputy’s actions
Shootings listed as self-defense

By Greg Barnes
Staff writer
A frantic Deputy Randall Butler radioed a Moore County sheriff’s dispatcher at about 2 p.m. Saturday.

‘‘I’ve got two down. Send me one, possibly two EMS units,’’ Butler told the dispatcher.

The deputy had just shot two Fort Bragg soldiers. Officials say he did not realize they were participating in a role-playing exercise known as Robin Sage, the final segment of the Special Forces Qualification Course.

The Sheriff’s Department released a copy of an often-garbled dispatcher’s tape on Monday afternoon. Shortly afterward, the District Attorney’s Office for Moore County announced that Butler was justified in his use of deadly force.

Officials say the shootings of Tallas Tomeny and Stephen Phelps were a tragic mistake. Butler and the Sheriff’s Department were unaware that the Army had been conducting the exercise.

Tomeny, of Waverly, Tenn., died, and Phelps, of Clearwater Fla., was in fair condition Monday night at FirstHealth Moore Regional Hospital in Pinehurst.


Deputy’s account
Sheriff’s Capt. Tommy Lucas and Detective Greg Beard provided a replay of what they said Butler told investigators:
It was cold Saturday, too cold for somebody to be riding in the back of a pickup truck. That is what Butler thought as a green Ford pickup traveled along N.C. 705 near Robbins.

As Butler watched the truck, it appeared that the passenger inside the cab tried to conceal something. The deputy decided to pull over the driver.

The truck pulled into the parking lot of the Acorn Ridge Baptist Church on Acorn Ridge Road. The driver approached the patrol car.

The man told Butler that his group was looking to hire migrant workers, raising the deputy’s suspicions even further because farm laborers don’t typically work this time of year.

Butler put the man in his patrol car and got his driver’s license: Charles Lieber, a civilian from Seagrove.

Butler had noticed that Tomeny, the passenger inside the pickup, had put something on the floorboard, which also raised his suspicions.

At some point, Butler called for backup.

Butler told Lieber to stay seated while he went to talk with Tomeny. Butler then asked to see what Tomeny had in his backpack.

When Tomeny allowed Butler only a cursory look, the deputy asked him to step outside, where he again asked to see what was in the bag. Again, he got a cursory look.

At Butler’s demand, Tomeny handed him the bag. Inside, Butler found what appeared to be two automatic rifles.

Tomeny tried to grab the bag back from Butler, who slung it on the ground near his patrol car and reached for his pistol, a .40-caliber Beretta.

He partly drew his gun but re-holstered it when Tomeny backed away. Tomeny came at him again, though, and Butler sprayed him with pepper spray.

‘‘Shoot him. Get the gun. Shoot him. He’s got a gun,’’ Capt. Lucas quoted Tomeny telling Phelps, who had been in the bed of the truck.

Phelps jumped out, knelt where Butler had thrown the bag and attempted to get out the rifles.

‘‘Randall Butler is telling him, ‘Show me your hands, show me your hands,’” Lucas said. ‘‘The guy continues to get the bag.’’

Butler fired twice at Phelps, hitting him in the arm and in the chest.

Tomeny started coming toward Butler, acting as though he had a gun hidden in his waistband.

‘‘Show me your hands, show me your hands,’’ Lucas quoted Butler as saying. ‘‘The guy never did show his hands.

“He (Butler) had all indications that the guy had a weapon as well, and he shot him also.’’

Lieber, whom investigators say has participated in other Robin Sage exercises, refused to comment Monday.


‘The big question’
Lucas and Beard said they don’t know why Lieber did not tell Butler about the exercise.
‘‘That’s the big question,’’ Lucas said. ‘‘We don’t know.’’ They speculated that Lieber thought Butler was part of the role- playing.

Other law enforcement agencies have participated in the exercises, which the Army has conducted at least since the 1950s.

Lucas and Beard said Moore County has never participated and never plans to.

They wonder what could happen if they were traveling through another county that was participating in the exercise without their knowledge.

‘‘We see an officer out there on the ground and another guy shooting at him, can you see the response we are going to have?’’ Lucas asked. ‘‘It’s got to be in a controlled environment.

‘‘It can’t be just anywhere on the streets and the highways of North Carolina,’’ Lucas said.

Participants in the Robin Sage exercise do not carry live ammunition, the Army said.

Lucas and Beard said Butler conducted a textbook response to the situation, and they would like to think they would have reacted the same way.


Justified force
In a statement, Garland N. Yates, the district attorney for Moore County, said he had been briefed on the investigation of the shooting done by the State Bureau of Investigation.
‘‘The use of deadly force by Deputy Randall Butler was lawful and justified under North Carolina law in that the deputy believed that he was facing an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death,’’ Yates said in the statement. ‘‘Deputy Butler had absolutely no knowledge that the soldiers involved were a part of a training exercise.’’

The Army refused to discuss the shooting Monday, but has called a news conference for 10 a.m. today at Stryker golf course on Fort Bragg.

Beard said the Army plans to conduct a complete overview of the exercise.

The 19-day Robin Sage exercise takes place in the Uwharrie National Forest and 10 surrounding counties, which make up a fictitious country called Pineland.

The responsibility for notifying local officials of exercises lies with the 1st Battalion of the 1st Special Warfare Training Group of the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School on Fort Bragg. The battalion is in charge of the qualification course.

Other law enforcement agencies criticized the Army’s notification attempts.

Montgomery County Sheriff Jeff Jordan said what happened in Moore County could have easily happened in his county.

‘‘About 13 years ago, it almost happened to us,’’ Jordan said.

‘‘We responded to a breaking and entering with four guys. It turned out they were training, and they thought we were role-playing, but we weren’t role-playing.’’

No one was injured in that incident.

Jordan said he rarely hears from the Army about its training exercises. He said he usually finds out through his patrol officers.

‘‘We usually don’t complain too much when they don’t tell us they’re here, but now this brings to light the fact that they need to let us know they’re here,’’ Jordan said.


‘Too darn dangerous’
He said his department would not engage in any role-playing with the Army.
‘‘It’s just too darn dangerous,’’ he said. ‘‘Our community supports the military big-time, but our deputies can’t afford to role-play with them.’’

Jordan said he expects communications with the Army to get better.

Troy Police Chief E.J. Phillips said his officers have worked with soldiers in the exercise and usually know when the military is training in the area.

‘‘It’s not been uncommon for us to assist them,’’ Phillips said. ‘‘If they need special assistance with something they’re doing they call us, and I try to help them coordinate all that stuff, but if they don’t, we usually don’t hear anything.’’Staff writer Arthur McLean contributed to this report.

CRad
03-07-2004, 18:46
Thank you Reaper.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 18:47
He also had a history of officer involved shootings.

In Moore Country, North Carolina?

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 18:48
Reaper,

Thank you Sir for providing information to enlighten me to the situation. I was only going off the news reports that I had seen.

Of course what CR just posted as I was posting this is what I had seen originally. Still reading.....

That and I'm still formulating answers to NDD's multiple posts!

CRad
03-07-2004, 18:49
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
In Moore Country, North Carolina?

No. At his prior jobs.

Bill Harsey
03-07-2004, 18:52
Reaper, Thanks for that. I knew there might be more to this story.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 18:53
I am through with it after Reaper's and CRad's posts. I wrote what I knew about Johnson, then deleted it.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 18:56
I'm going to start a thread about Martha Stewart now.:D

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 18:58
NDD,

There are always two sides to every story. Reaper shared one, and the above news article shared another.

I can't see another reason for the Deputy to open fire unless he was in fear for his life. And someone shouting, "Shoot him!, Shoot him!" would do it for me.

We could drop this part, but I would like to address one of your earlier posts about the "chip" leo's have.

TR,

Sir, I find it hard to believe that the Deputy killed another man just because he could, to get a "notch", as you say.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 18:59
Goat head

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 19:01
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
Goat head

I may be many things, but goathead ain't one of them! ;)

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 19:03
Go ahead then

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 19:14
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
The part that I don't like is the "chip". I don't understand why current and former LEOs think everybody is picking on them all the time. Not all, but most I have seen on here and SOCNET. If I wanted to pick on LEOs, I would go over to one of their boards and do it.

I'm also a little tired of the concept that LEOs are above question. Soldiers certainly aren't. I have yet to see anybody try to justify NDs resulting in death, the sale of classified information, that terrorist that threw the hand grenades in the tent, etc. When a soldier gets in trouble with the law for major things like murder, etc., other soldiers don't make excuses for him.


NDD,

There is good reasons why LEO's think everyone is picking on them. Most of the time, they are right. With the *possible* exception of medical personnel, no other profession has it's *every* move criticized by the general public.

In LE work, you have to make a thousand decisions every day while simultaneously balancing citizen's rights with your safety. That, and you know that every move you make will be put under a microscope for days at a time. The same decision that you made in a microsecond, some court gets months to decide if you made the right decision.

Think about your current, or your former job. Think if you were required to videotape everything you did, so some bureacrat or defense lawyer could tear you a new one. think about being in a bubble where your every move could result in you losing your job. I guess it would kinda be like being in the "Q" for your entire time you were in the military. Every decision of yours second guessed to see if you should keep your job. Think you would have a "chip" too?

I don't know anyone who thinks that LEO's are above question. That's all LEO's do, is get questioned.

Admit it. While you may claim to be generally pro-Law enforcement, the majority of police incidents you view you go in with the pre-conceived notion that the LEO's overstepped their bounds. Unfortunately, most of the general public feels the same.

It amazes me that non-leo friends, family, and others can watch the same incident as me and come to the conclusion that the leo in question was 100% in the wrong and should be fired. Some of these are the same incidents where I either see that the LEO didn't do anything wrong, or where perhaps I would have gone about it differently then he did, but nothing that constitutes someone losing their job.

I don't even think you can make anywhere near the same comparisons as with soldiers. It's pretty easy to keep your nose clean in the military. The lines are VERY clear. Not so in cop work.

I'm not saying all cops are perfect. I know they aren't. But the majority of cops I worked with were good guys trying to do a hard job to the best of their abilities. Believe it or not, repeated studies have shown overwhelmingly that most cops routinely use a lot less force then they could or should. I'll let you guess why.

The Reaper
03-07-2004, 19:21
Originally posted by woobie master
NDD,

There are always two sides to every story. Reaper shared one, and the above news article shared another.

I can't see another reason for the Deputy to open fire unless he was in fear for his life. And someone shouting, "Shoot him!, Shoot him!" would do it for me.

We could drop this part, but I would like to address one of your earlier posts about the "chip" leo's have.

The ones CRad posted were from Sheriff's side only and were immediately after the incident.

Do you really think that the LT shouted "Shoot him!", to his NCO sitting well away in the back of a pick-up truck with their only weapon being a disassembled M-4? I really doubt it.

After reading all of the accounts, and speaking with one of the participants, I believe that the command was much more likely to have been just, "Get the gun!" to keep the deputy from taking the issued weapon. I think the "Shoot him!" claim was part of the cover-up attempt.

The department did later admit that they had been told of the exercise, and it was printed on page 12 of the major regional paper.

Got some decent friends with the SO, Butler was not one of them.

TR

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 19:25
The only cases I've commented on are this one and mentioned the Johnson case.

You are talking about an LEO losing his job. What about the dead LT.? What about the Sergeant that may not recover enough to retain to training or even the military.

When we began this discussion, while I admit I am parcial to the other side, I did not blame the LEO. I said there's no excuse and somebody had screwed up. That somebody could have also meant whoever was suppsoed to inform them and didn't. Or even the victims perhaps.

I thought it was pretty clear that I was speaking in general. However you obviously assumed that I was blaming the LEO. I was very careful not to do that because I didn't know enough about it. And yet you felt the need, at least initially, to defend the LEo by asaking for a clarification.

What I am saying is that there is no excuse whatsoever for this to have happened and somebody screwed up. One man is dead and another is wounded. I don't think the deputy should get ridden out of town on a rail without a trial or investigation or whatever. But are you going to tell me that based on what we have read here the incident has been investigated and you're sure the LEO was not at fault and is telling the truth?

Where in all those articles did you see this?
From what I read on this it was a tragic event caused by the lack of common sense on the trainee's fault.

And where in my posts did you see this?
And from your post you believe this situation to be the fault of the LEO's?

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 19:31
Originally posted by The Reaper
The ones CRad posted were from Sheriff's side only and were immediately after the incident.

Do you really think that the LT shouted "Shoot him!", to his NCO sitting well away in the back of a pick-up truck with their only weapon being a disassembled M-4? I really doubt it.

After reading all of the accounts, and speaking with one of the participants, I believe that the command was much more likely to have been just, "Get the gun!" to keep the deputy from taking the issued weapon. I think the "Shoot him!" claim was part of the cover-up attempt.

The department did later admit that they had been told of the exercise, and it was printed on page 12 of the major regional paper.

Got some decent friends with the SO, Butler was not one of them.

TR

Sir,

I wasn't there, and obviously a lot of major facts are in dispute. Like I said, there are two sides to every story. I won't attempt to argue any other points without the whole story.

I will say this. I don't believe the Deputy shot him because he thought he could get away with it. Do you?

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 19:36
He did get away with it

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 19:44
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
The only cases I've commented on are this one and mentioned the Johnson case.

You are talking about an LEO losing his job. What about the dead LT.? What about the Sergeant that may not recover enough to retain to training or even the military.

When we began this discussion, while I admit I am parcial to the other side, I did not blame the LEO. I said there's no excuse and somebody had screwed up. That somebody could have also meant whoever was suppsoed to inform them and didn't. Or even the victims perhaps.

I thought it was pretty clear that I was speaking in general. However you obviously assumed that I was blaming the LEO. I was very careful not to do that because I didn't know enough about it. And yet you felt the need, at least initially, to defend the LEo by asaking for a clarification.

What I am saying is that there is no excuse whatsoever for this to have happened and somebody screwed up. One man is dead and another is wounded. I don't think the deputy should get ridden out of town on a rail without a trial or investigation or whatever. But are you going to tell me that based on what we have read here the incident has been investigated and you're sure the LEO was not at fault and is telling the truth?

NDD,

As the discussion progressed I felt as if you were clearly insinuating that it was the LEO's fault. I also realize this is a hard subject to discuss on this particular board.

I have no idea what really happened out there. I think it would be best for all involved if it was finally resolved. I just cannot find it in me to think that this cop fired his weapon for any other reason that he was reasonably in fear for his life. I do agree that this was a tragic situation that should have never happened and that a few people were in error on this one.

It's hard to sit back and analyze an LEO situation that you were not a part of or that you aren't connected to and be able to say for sure either way.

As a cop, with conflicting stories, you have to go with whichever one is most probable. I don't believe that everything that happens with cops is a cover up. And I don't believe everything I read in the paper. Like I said, I don't believe the cop shot those people for any reason other then being in reasonable fear for his life.

It's probably best if we ended this part of the discussion. Tragic, and shouldn't have happened. I think we all agree on that.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 19:46
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
He did get away with it

Why do you think he shot them then?


I don't mind if you defer and end this portion of the conversation.

But answer my other response! :cool:

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 19:48
Why do you think he shot them then?

Is this the question you want me to answer? I'm confused.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 19:52
Por favor.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 20:01
Ok, this is what I think and its only my opinion and not based on anything other than that.

I don't think he stopped them with the intention of shooting them. I think he stopped them to screw with them and the situation escalated beyond his ability to control it. I thinked he stopped them because they were soldiers on robin sage and he was bored.

I think he knew or had a pretty good idea of who and what they were, if not before then soon after. I think when he sprayed the guy with the gas and it didn't put him down, it scared him.

Now he may have feared for his life or safety towards the end, perhaps because they stayed in role and caused him to doubt what he knew to be true, but I think this situation was of his making and he escalated it.

Edit to add - I think he is a bad cop with a penchant, if the report is true about his past, for going to his gun too quick and that he has no place in law enforcement in general. It would not surprise me to learn that he has a history of wife abuse or racial violence as well.

And I think one man is dead and another injured because he abused his discretion and decided it wasn't normal for people to ride in the back of a pick up in winter.

The Reaper
03-07-2004, 20:10
Originally posted by woobie master
Sir,

I wasn't there, and obviously a lot of major facts are in dispute. Like I said, there are two sides to every story. I won't attempt to argue any other points without the whole story.

I will say this. I don't believe the Deputy shot him because he thought he could get away with it. Do you?

I think the deputy was situationally unaware, violated policies established for his own and the public's safety, was arrogant, failed to control the situation, escalated the force continuum to unnecessary levels, acted like a cowboy, possibly intentionally, took a good man's life and seriously altered another's who also wanted to serve their country.

I live in the same county, and am uncomfortable with this man ever being allowed to carry a weapon again, either as a public servant or as a private citizen. You know the type, those who usee to get beat up in school and see their badge and weapon as an opportunity to exercise their power and take down people to prove themselves.

I do not like cop bashing either, having spent several years working for a department myself, but I cannot abide bad cops, or those who cover up or are apologists for them. Those few are why people fear and dislike the other 95% of LEOs who are out there doing a good job with marginal training and equipment, for surprisingly small salaries.

IMHO, this guy was a loose cannon and hit the wrong situation. He got away with it, and two soldiers paid the price.

TR

The Reaper
03-07-2004, 20:17
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
Ok, this is what I think and its only my opinion and not based on anything other than that.

I don't think he stopped them with the intention of shooting them. I think he stopped them to screw with them and the situation escalated beyond his ability to control it. I thinked he stopped them because they were soldiers on robin sage and he was bored.

I think he knew or had a pretty good idea of who and what they were, if not before then soon after. I think when he sprayed the guy with the gas and it didn't put him down, it scared him.

Now he may have feared for his life or safety towards the end, perhaps because they stayed in role and caused him to doubt what he knew to be true, but I think this situation was of his making and he escalated it.

Edit to add - I think he is a bad cop with a penchant, if the report is true about his past, for going to his gun too quick and that he has no place in law enforcement in general. It would not surprise me to learn that he has a history of wife abuse or racial violence as well.

And I think one man is dead and another injured because he abused his discretion and decided it wasn't normal for people to ride in the back of a pick up in winter.

I think you are correct, he has shot people on more than one other occasion, causing his release from at least one other department for excessive use of force, and I have heard that he was under a domestic violence protective order when he shot the soldiers. A friend of ours knew him since high school, said that this incident was not a surprise from him.

Not a personal shot at you, WM, but to turn your question around, why is it that cops automatically take the LEO's side, even when he is wrong, or the events indicate that he is?

I think that causes citizens to assume that it doesn't matter what really happened, the cops will close ranks and sweep it under the rug.

IMHO, you should be on a bad cop's case like white on rice.

TR

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 20:18
Hijack...

So, I was glad Martha got nailed this past week.
NDD, You own Kmart stock? I bet you think it was "a good thing" that the charges of insider trading were dropped?

ktek01
03-07-2004, 20:40
Originally posted by woobie master
NDD,

Like I said, I don't believe the cop shot those people for any reason other then being in reasonable fear for his life.


Officers do sometimes escalate a situation out of control, because they are scared, and end up shooting people. Don't make me post that link to Trooper Latikas shooting, it does happen. I am normally 100% behind LEO's, but like any profession there are bad apples, and like TR said when you find one you should be on them like white on rice. Sometimes I think the blue line goes too far protecting dirt bags, loosing some friends in the process, and giving ammo to your real enemies. Some also target soldiers, not all of them, and not every PD, but that does happen too and I have seen it first hand. Some posts have very good relationships with the LEO's outside the gate, some just see the base as a big cow to milk for all its worth. Ft Stewart was bad for a while, until they locked up the Police Chief, but it paled in comparison to places like Ft Polk, and a few others.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 20:42
Not a personal shot at you, WM, but to turn your question around, why is it that cops automatically take the LEO's side, even when he is wrong, or the events indicate that he is?

TR,

Sir, I think cops are more likely to give fellow cops the benefit of the doubt. Cops will stick up for each other because not only will no one else, but everyone is quick to condemn cops. If a cop is clearly wrong, good cops do like to see that cop fired/prosecuted, just because it gives all cops a bad name.

From your last post it does appear that this guys is a bad apple. Specifically-

"I think you are correct, he has shot people on more than one other occasion, causing his release from at least one other department for excessive use of force, and I have heard that he was under a domestic violence protective order when he shot the soldiers. A friend of ours knew him since high school, said that this incident was not a surprise from him."

Getting back to the question of the "Thin Blue Line". It's a complex question, and I'm not sure that I could fully answer it.

I will say that coverups don't happen nearly as often as folks believe. I knew *one* cop that there was a rumor that he did cocaine. I knew of absolutely no instances of a coverup by patrol officers.

Most of the time, cops are so scared of being fired or sued that they use less force then they should. There are exceptions to everything, and a lot depends on what part of the country you are in. I wouldn't fuck around with an Socal cop at all....or a new orleans one, or NYPD. In washington state, you can pretty much run your mouth w/out fear of an unwarranted ass beating. Not so other places. I don't know how it is where you live.

Does that cover it?

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 20:45
Originally posted by ktek01
Officers do sometimes escalate a situation out of control, because they are scared, and end up shooting people. Don't make me post that link to Trooper Latikas shooting, it does happen. I am normally 100% behind LEO's, but like any profession there are bad apples, and like TR said when you find one you should be on them like white on rice. Sometimes I think the blue line goes too far protecting dirt bags, loosing some friends in the process, and giving ammo to your real enemies. Some also target soldiers, not all of them, and not every PD, but that does happen too and I have seen it first hand. Some posts have very good relationships with the LEO's outside the gate, some just see the base as a big cow to milk for all its worth. Ft Stewart was bad for a while, until they locked up the Police Chief, but it paled in comparison to places like Ft Polk, and a few others.

Ktek-

The latikas shooting, if it's the one I am thinking of, was totally ridiculous. Non-leo folks probably watch that and think it happens all the time, or with great frequency. It doesn't. There is only one, or maybe two reasons why that stupid biatch isn't in jail. I'm sure you know why.

ktek01
03-07-2004, 21:02
Originally posted by woobie master
Ktek-

The latikas shooting, if it's the one I am thinking of, was totally ridiculous. Non-leo folks probably watch that and think it happens all the time, or with great frequency. It doesn't. There is only one, or maybe two reasons why that stupid biatch isn't in jail. I'm sure you know why.

That is probably the one, and no, I dont think it happens all the time and I do understand why she is still on the job. The point I was trying to make was, the DA should have been all over her instead of defending her actions. While that may have made him a few brownie points with certain groups, it tends to alienate those that are normally Pro LEO. That is an extreme case, but LEOs do tend to close ranks even around bad apples because the Us Vs Them mentallity sets in.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 21:12
Originally posted by ktek01
That is probably the one, and no, I dont think it happens all the time and I do understand why she is still on the job. The point I was trying to make was, the DA should have been all over her instead of defending her actions. While that may have made him a few brownie points with certain groups, it tends to alienate those that are normally Pro LEO. That is an extreme case, but LEOs do tend to close ranks even around bad apples because the Us Vs Them mentallity sets in.

That particular case is more of an issue of PC gone awry then police corruption.



but LEOs do tend to close ranks even around bad apples because the Us Vs Them mentallity sets in.

Depends on what part of the country you work in. Not saying it doesn't happen. Definitely not my experience as a cop. Good cops don't want to be associated with bad apples, and some folks are so scared at even a hint of a coverup that they go the other way to the extreme.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 21:17
I am referring more to the internet. What do you think would happen here, on SOCNET or LF if I posted some case and said they should fry the LEO? Like the one with the SF Studs?

Wanna find out?

The Reaper
03-07-2004, 21:19
Originally posted by woobie master
I wouldn't fuck around with an Socal cop at all....or a new orleans one, or NYPD. In washington state, you can pretty much run your mouth w/out fear of an unwarranted ass beating. Not so other places. I don't know how it is where you live.


I don't know, I don't mess around with cops, though for a while after I got a fast sports car, I did get stopped a lot. I am older now, slowed down a bit, maintain SA, and I guess look like a responsible citizen.

If I get pulled over, and I am doing something wrong, I'll take the cite, if there is no alternative. If I have an argument, I/my lawyer can make it in court. Roadside is not the place or time to get ignorant and rude. I do know some of the sensitive issues, and try to follow the rules for a non-threatening experience for both of us, since some might find me intimidating.

BTW, why would a cop risk legal or civil action by issuing an unwarranted ass beating, just because the citizen is running his mouth?

I was stopped a couple of months ago after I picked up a new car (2004 model, not many around then), the officer asked for the registration (but not my ID), looked over it to check the car more closely and told me to have a nice evening. That would have irritated me a few years back, I just find it humorous now.

When I was younger here in NC, you could mess with the local city cops, or the deputies, but the NC Highway Patrol were serious and brooked no BS. Things were different back then though.

TR

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 21:20
I could guess the outcome.

We could pick another case to discuss if you want.

I'm a little pooped-The SF saturation wore me out! ;)

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 21:22
Originally posted by woobie master
Depends on what part of the country you work in. Not saying it doesn't happen. Definitely not my experience as a cop. Good cops don't want to be associated with bad apples, and some folks are so scared at even a hint of a coverup that they go the other way to the extreme.

Isn't this the same guy I got into a debate with over the supposed "WACO conspiracy"? Weren't you arguing about how the feds covered that up to protect their owneven though it involved multiple agencies including some military SMU advisors according to congretional testimony? Or is it only the feds in the DEA, FBI, ATF, and possibly military advisors that are crooked and well practiced liars and coverup artists? LOL

Couldn't pass it up... it was glaring so bright in the nightime sky that I had to call you out on it. LOL :p

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 21:30
TR,

I'm in agreement with your last post. As for....

"BTW, why would a cop risk legal or civil action by issuing an unwarranted ass beating, just because the citizen is running his mouth?"

In higher crime areas the cops tend to be a little rougher. They don't put up with BS.

I've been stopped/ticketed for some pretty chincy shit. Some agencies have reputations as ticket writers/being a-holes, as you may know. A lot of state patrol/highway patrol units come to mind.

I've chewed out cops who have acted unprofessional AND had written me a citation. I figured, If It's already been written, I might as well let him know how I feel if he's being an ass.

Examples-Pulled over for 2 mph over and no other reason....written at 5 over, etc.

I'm digressing now. I just wanted to add that I don't claim to speak for all cops. I can only go off my experiences and those of my friends that are still cops.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 21:34
Originally posted by Sacamuelas
Isn't this the same guy I got into a debate with over the supposed "WACO conspiracy"? Weren't you arguing about how the feds covered that up to protect their owneven though it involved multiple agencies including some military SMU advisors according to congretional testimony? Or is it only the feds in the DEA, FBI, ATF, and possibly military advisors that are crooked and well practiced liars and coverup artists? LOL

Couldn't pass it up... it was glaring so bright in the nightime sky that I had to call you out on it. LOL

Please don't tell me you are the anti-tinfoiler from socnet????? :rolleyes:


Yeah, I think the ATF is all fucked up, and yeah, I think there were coverups at Ruby Ridge and WACO. Big difference between local and fed law enforcement. Or city/county and state, for that matter.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 21:35
Suconmaballs-

Your inbox is full bro!

:D

ktek01
03-07-2004, 21:37
All very true, but remember we are talking to each other from all over the globe. Others may not have had as nice an experience with LEOs as you or I have had. Hard to apply what you know from yours, to what someone else has seen in his. I think the vast majority of LEOs are good people, and most PDs are good also. However, when you get large PDs like NY with 39K Officers you will have bad apples in any group that large, and with some small underbudgeted, understaffed, undertrained, non accredited PDs you can get some real winners in there. When they started Floridas certification program it was amazing. Small PDs that never did a single background check on any Officers had to start checking all of them. IIRC one of the city PDs near me found out the Chief was a convicted child molester when his came back. :eek: That of course was the purpose of the program, to raise the level of professionalism, and to do away with this reputation. They still have a long battle to fight, and in some areas they have made huge strides in doing so. Some have not, and until they do it will continue to hurt even the good officers and PDs. I still blame a lot of it on the people and politicians, they dont take law enforcement seriously enough IMO. Of course this varies greatly from community to community, some outstanding very professional small town PDs out there, and some outstanding big city ones too. The turds however are still out there, a lot less then there used to be, but still damaging the rep of fine upstanding professional LEOs every where. Ever been to Jessup, GA? LOL

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 21:39
Ktek-

I have had my ass kicked (unprovoked) by a more then a few socal cops. While I agree with your post, I can't say that my lEO experience as a non-leo has been "nice". ;)

Will this thread ever end?

lol

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 21:42
LOL..
That name crap ain't funny!!

I am working on it. I had them all archived like TS dictated in knuckledragger thread. I thought that freed up the PM count??? Oh well, so much for my computer skills.

Anyway, I will delete some of my old ones. Someone on Socnet wrote me and he wants his tinhat back.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 21:43
Watch the language cop apologist, there are ladies present.

ktek01
03-07-2004, 21:48
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
I am referring more to the internet. What do you think would happen here, on SOCNET or LF if I posted some case and said they should fry the LEO? Like the one with the SF Studs?

Wanna find out?

One of the only times I can recall LEOs being openly disgusted with another LEO was the Trooper Latika incident. Even on Officer.com they were all over her and wished she would hang. Unfortunately that is the only time I can recall not even one LEO defending an obviously bad apple, but that was a rather extreme incident, and all caught on tape. :D

http://ada.oklahoman.net/ramgen/real/save/trooper_shooting.rm

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 21:48
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
Watch the language cop apologist, there are ladies present.

No prob NDD.....but Sacamuelas
ain't exactly a lady. Why I gotta be a "cop apologist"? I prefer "coperator" or "profiler" or something to that extent. ;)

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 21:52
Originally posted by woobie master
No prob NDD.....but Sacamuelas
ain't exactly a lady. Why I gotta be a "cop apologist"? I prefer "coperator" or "profiler" or something to that extent. ;)

Well no, but he is a girl with a man's gun that measures his shot groups with a yardstick from BB&B.

The Reaper
03-07-2004, 21:54
Originally posted by woobie master
No prob NDD.....but Sacamuelas
ain't exactly a lady. Why I gotta be a "cop apologist"? I prefer "coperator" or "profiler" or something to that extent.

"Copulator" work for you, or would you prefer "Excessive Force Employer"?:D

TR

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 21:59
Originally posted by The Reaper
"Copulator" work for you, or would you prefer "Excessive Force Employer"?

TR

Definitely Excessive Force Employer, Sir.

I found this pic of TR and NDD instructing on Naval maneuvers..... :D

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:00
(Suits up in Kevlar)

:munchin

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 22:03
Good God that was quick.. I step away to eat with the Mrs. and I get ambushed by the vocabulary sniper(NDD). BE careful WM, NDD is real touchy on which cool guy words you use and to whom. Some sort of inferiority complex issue I am working with him on. LOL

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:05
Dude, How did you hijack my computer and post that crap? I would never post something like that.......

The Reaper
03-07-2004, 22:06
Originally posted by Sacamuelas
Good God that was quick.. I step away to eat with the Mrs. and I get ambushed by the vocabulary sniper(NDD). BE careful WM, NDD is real touchy on which cool guy words you use and to whom. Some sort of inferiority complex issue I am working with him on. LOL

This, from a kid with a big pistol, and a big stick (the wooden kind, not the tiny one he uses the microscope to examine).

Glad that my dental appointments are GTG for a while, they probably have a secret commo system or something for problem patients.

TR

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 22:07
I can do special avatars as well as titles. I am multi-tasking!

Smokin Joe
03-07-2004, 22:08
Originally posted by woobie master
Dude, How did you hijack my computer and post that crap? I would never post something like that.......

His name wasn't Sneaky for nothing. :)

The Reaper
03-07-2004, 22:11
Originally posted by woobie master
Definitely Excessive Force Employer, Sir.

I found this pic of TR and NDD instructing on Naval maneuvers..... :D

woobie master, on the phone outside his palatial estate.

TR

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 22:13
I KNEW you would abuse your powers eventually.

LOL

I was hoping the Team Sergeant still had a "lock" on my title. HaHa

BULLY..

I am getting ready.. :lifter

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:13
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
I can do special avatars as well as titles. I am multi-tasking!

I forget NDD is an Admin sometimes

Heheheheheee........:D

I know you guys just don't feel the same without a Ragnar to raz!

TR,

Scary thing is Sir, that's prolly your neighbor!

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 22:15
Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
I am multi-tasking!


Good job, I am impressed you migrant worker serf...
You keep that up and I may hire your gringo A$$ to work in one of my sweatshops. LOL

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 22:17
That wasn't abuse. Keep it up and I'll show you abuse.:D

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:19
Sneaky was always referred to as the master of camoflauge by his teammates...here he is getting ready to ambush Barney.....

The Reaper
03-07-2004, 22:21
NDD:

Sometimes, it is useful to select one of the problem children and make him an example to the others on how NOT to behave.

TR

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:23
Originally posted by The Reaper
NDD:

Sometimes, it is useful to select one of the problem children and make him an example to the others on how NOT to behave.

TR

No Sir, a lesson is not necessary!

:munchin

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 22:24
I nominate Woobie... :munchin

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:26
Originally posted by Sacamuelas
I nominate Woobie... :munchin

Buddy is only half the word.........



Blue Falcon..........

Smokin Joe
03-07-2004, 22:27
Originally posted by The Reaper
NDD:

Sometimes, it is useful to select one of the problem children and make him an example to the others on how NOT to behave.

TR

That will make you $h*t your pants! :D

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 22:27
.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 22:27
Despite recent changes in 2nd Batt policy, former members have decided to keep the traditional "High and Tight" haircut to protest the change.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:27
NDD, gracias for the avatar, but what is it?

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:29
Nice one, sucamajules!

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 22:29
Originally posted by woobie master
NDD, gracias for the avatar, but what is it?

You, getting mad because somebody questioned an LEO.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 22:31
Should have kept up the PT and laid off the doughnuts when you got out.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:33
DAMN! Give me the bald headed guy back! purty please?

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 22:33
OMG!!! ROTFLMAO

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 22:34
sacamuelas says "Open wide, no! Like this!"

Two examples are better than one.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:34
You got an awful purty mouth boy......

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 22:35
Sneaky, make it stop..........

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 22:38
I don't know how to take them out, only put them in. Sorry.

The Reaper
03-07-2004, 22:41
Originally posted by woobie master
You got an awful purty mouth boy......

I don't think you would want to drop anything in there that you wanted back in one piece.

Looks like that doughnut generalization is true. You live in a Krispy Kreme?

Nice work, NDD, two examples are even better than one!

Hopefully, a lesson will be learned as they appreciate the new avatars for what, 30 days or so? Or will they go for 60?

TR

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 22:44
I think until they get 100 posts, and quality counts, so they can change them themselves - or was the rule 500 posts? I forget, Oh well.

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 22:51
I'm going to bed. 'Night all.

BadMuther
03-07-2004, 23:02
Night.


:rolleyes:

Sopranos is on!!!

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 23:17
Per request by admin...

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 23:18
Originally posted by Sacamuelas
Per request by admin...

LOL - where's my yardstick?

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 23:23
Your medic would need a bucket and a sponge... not a yardstick! LOL

Good night senior senor

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 23:25
LOL - did you find it yet?

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 23:27
I'm back...... :D

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 23:28
Why does it have that crappy white background? LOL

Sacamuelas
03-07-2004, 23:31
Give me time... some power crazy admin deleted my last one. I will eventually find the one that I had before... :p

NousDefionsDoc
03-07-2004, 23:34
I guess if I'm going to do things, I should learn to undo 'em too...naaaw!

The Reaper
03-08-2004, 00:01
Yet another lesson learned! :boohoo

Who would have ever thought that a couple of SF guys and a fast internet connection could teach such a number of non-SF guys so many things?

I hope WM is watching The Sopranos closely for object lessons about messing with the Boss on his turf.

TR

NousDefionsDoc
03-08-2004, 00:02
And on that note, I will retire. Good night for real.

BadMuther
03-08-2004, 00:05
Originally posted by The Reaper
Yet another lesson learned!

Who would have ever thought that a couple of SF guys and a fast internet connection could teach such a number of non-SF guys so many things?

I hope WM is watching The Sopranos closely for object lessons about messing with the Boss on his turf.

TR

You FOGs never have a sense of humor...and us young guys never learn!!!

:p

CRad
03-08-2004, 01:51
My power goes out for a couple hours, I miss the Sopranos season opener and you guys declaring open season on WM. Darn it.

As for a Martha Thread, Didn't you get your tail whooped good enough the other night NDD? Do you really need more humilation? Glutton!

pulque
03-08-2004, 03:54
all the popcorn is gone, and there is some purple fuzz and and a BB&B reciept on the floor. nothing to see here but alot of sleeping. moving along..

Ockham's Razor
03-08-2004, 04:57
Originally posted by CRad
My power goes out for a couple hours, I miss the Sopranos season opener and you guys declaring open season on WM. Darn it.



FBI set a sting, rounded up every member of the crew. The rest of the season will be courtroom drama. heh...

The first episode is very slow. Hopefully, a healthy dose of Steve Buschemi will move things along. The man is a brilliant, yet creepy, actor.

You did not miss much. Hopefully, the second episode will have a bit more fluidity.

How can anyone declare war on Woobie when his avatar is such a morale booster? Well, maybe not here, but elsewhere.

Sigi
03-08-2004, 09:38
Originally posted by The Reaper


Do you really think that the LT shouted "Shoot him!", to his NCO sitting well away in the back of a pick-up truck with their only weapon being a disassembled M-4? I really doubt it.

After reading all of the accounts, and speaking with one of the participants, I believe that the command was much more likely to have been just, "Get the gun!" to keep the deputy from taking the issued weapon. I think the "Shoot him!" claim was part of the cover-up attempt.



TR

I doubt they said "shoot him," but "get the gun" isn't that much better. I don't take either side in this case because I don't have enough info.

(Just some background:Godfather was SF (Reserves) and attended FBI Nat'l Academy before becoming Chief of Police in Boulder City, NV. Father was Lt. on local police, cousin was SAC ATF, and brother's are local Deputy Sheriff's.)

If all five of them were involved in this particular stop I don't feel they would have let it get to the point of shooting. But let's say it did get to that point.

If you hear "get the gun" it does not mean you have to shoot, but as a LE officer, prudence would dictate that you draw your weapon, right?

I think the officer may have let this get out of hand. The SF candidate('s) thought this was part of the Pineland exercise, right? That is the shame of it.

It may well be a warranted shooting based on the "get the gun" comments, however, this could have been handled much better by the officer.

Having a badge does not entitle a person to act like an a-hole. None of my relatives in LEO are like that, but unfortunately more than a few of their fellow officers are. I don't know the officer, but it smells like he may fall into a 10% category.