Rise of the Warrior Cop

[BryanK]

Originally Posted by SF-TX

Thirteen officers raid animal shelter to 'rescue' whitetail fawn. Really?

I sure hope these departments change their spots soon. In the future if these Jane/John doe's wish to rescue wild animals, they need to infawn the local law enforcement agency before hand. Oh deer, what have we become?

[TacOfficer]

Originally Posted by Tree Potato

Relying on judgement of police on the scene rather than clearly defined rules, coupled with insufficient training, is going to get more people killed.

A recent personal example that turned out okay in the end is that in May my apartment just outside the border of DC was broken into. At 5 am on a Saturday someone forced their way through my dead bolted and door-bar secured door, and was met by a 12 gauge and clear instructions. 911 was called, officers were dispatched, and I made it very clear to the 911 operator that I was holding the person at gunpoint until police arrived. When the 8 officers burst into my apartment without announcing themselves before entering I had to quickly determine whether they were accomplices of the intruder, or if they were the good guys. There were no sirens, and I hadn't been told by the 911 dispatcher (still on the phone) that police had arrived on scene; the police didn't direct the 911 dispatcher to let me know they were coming in or even announce who they were after they came running through the door. Fortunately I recognized a badge, informed them who I was, that I had called 911, that the person nearest them had broken in, slowly set my shotgun down, and ended up being handcuffed until the officers calmed down and verified my identity. Had they used better judgement before coming through the door it would not have been as dangerous a situation as they turned it into.

IMO their training and judgement fell short and we're lucky no one was hurt. The ambiguous guidance being given by the courts, and leaving it to under-trained cops to make entry decisions on the fly while they're in the thick of things, is a very dangerous path to go down.

Tree Potato,
Reading your scenario, it sounds like it happened by the numbers, The officer's training prevented anyone from being injured or you being disarmed by the intruder and becoming a statistic. Yes you can expect to be handcuffed during a hostile scene until all identities are resolved. The police don't have the luxury of seeing your "badge" and have to ensure you haven't been disarmed/compromised by the intruder.

Politicians on the trail or in office scream to crack down on crime, the community says we need more police to protect themselves and our fearless leaders order us into the breach (you first). And after all that, the community complains that our mere police presence is oppressive and some how it's the officer's fault for giving them what they asked for in the first place.

Most members here are capable of defending themselves and don't rely on a nanny state to coddle them when they see a shadow. I respect that, a lot. It's those that demand the services of a nanny state then complain when they (the criminal element) do wrong and the police are there to see it. "Watch them, not me!"

FWIW: Feds love to throw state and locals under the bus.
BTDT (and still no t-shirt).

TO

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by BryanK

I sure hope these departments change their spots soon. In the future if these Jane/John doe's wish to rescue wild animals, they need to infawn the local law enforcement agency before hand. Oh deer, what have we become?

Go do pushups, I'll let you know when I'm tired......

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

Simply the fawn could have been armed. And there's no doubt in my mind that the guy had links to al quada using Society of St. Francis as a front. You ask why "Nine" heavily armed DNR agents and "four" sheriff department personnel? How else do you justify your job in the middle of a recession. This is not the rise of the "warrior cop" (I laugh every time I read that) it's the rise of the idiot cops. And let's not forget the drone and drone operators that took aerial photos.

All in all a few thousand dollars of taxpayer's money spent on "Operation Fawn-bin-laden".

Well done officers....

You should see what they will do to you for the possession of one single eagle feather.

TR

[cbtengr]

In all fairness to the officers the fawn in question was wearing camouflage and there was the potential for disease and danger to humans.
I euthanized a ground squirrel out in my yard earlier today and it did not take a SWAT team , but that's the difference between Iowa and Wisconsin too much overkill up there !

[MR2]

Originally Posted by cbtengr

In all fairness to the officers the fawn in question was wearing camouflage and there was the potential for disease and danger to humans.
I euthanized a ground squirrel out in my yard earlier today and it did not take a SWAT team , but that's the difference between Iowa and Wisconsin too much overkill up there !

But now you are being targeted by a PETA SWAT Team.

[Pete]

Subway Stabbing Victim Can't Sue NYPD For Failing To Save Him

http://gothamist.com/2013/07/26/subw...uit_agains.php

"A man who was brutally stabbed by Brooklyn subway slasher Maksim Gelman two years ago had his negligence case against the city dismissed in court yesterday, despite the fact that two transit officers had locked themselves in a motorman's car only a few feet from him at the time of the attack. ..............."

Well, at least those two "Warriors" went home alive that day.

The average citizen has no right to expect protection by the local police. The SC has said it time and time again.

[ddoering]

On the plus side they did capture one Canadian goose that was here illegally.
Score one for ICE.

[cbtengr]

Originally Posted by MR2

But now you are being targeted by a PETA SWAT Team.

That does not concern me as I had a rat writ that was rit for a rat.

[fng13]

Unnecessary and sad.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...t-police-taser

The old man, described by a family member as "wobbly" on his feet, had refused medical attention. The paramedics were called. They brought in the Park Forest police.

First they tased him, but that didn't work. So they fired a shotgun, hitting him in the stomach with a bean-bag round. Wrana was struck with such force that he bled to death internally, according to the Cook County medical examiner.

At least all of the officers went home safe. After all refusing medical treatment is a great reason to kill someone.

ETA: Police said he had a knife, but this is refuted in this article

http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/ww...077#f284da71cc

Officers reported that a knife had been pulled, but no knife was found on the scene. The police used a riot shield, shotgun and taser on a 95-year-old man in a walker who arguably presented no threat to anyone but himself.

[ironyoshi]

Originally Posted by fng13

ETA: Police said he had a knife, but this is refuted in this article

http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/ww...077#f284da71cc

You'll also find this in the article:

But one senior police official who has trained police recruits in defensive tactics had a different take.

"When I first heard it, I was like, 'C'mon,'" he said. "Then I thought it through. We don't know what occurred. We don't know what information they had at that time. If you don't have all of the facts, it's hard to judge someone. … Anyone can be dangerous."

Right, this was one of those steroid-pumping 95-year old studs. The funny thing is, every time a death from mostly-nonlethal devices (tazers, beanbags) gets in the news, someone will always be saying "but if it weren't for those things, the cops would have to physically subdue the individual, which is more dangerous." So how is four or five grown men holding this senior citizen down more dangerous than shooting him with a beanbag gun behind a riot shield?

On another note, regarding the explanations proffered in this thread painting the multitude of SWAT incidents on a few bad apples or an isolated misuse of the system, I don't buy it. When we talk about government, we generally assume that the power to take unilateral action will always result in tyranny. There is no such human that can be trusted with that kind of latitude.

So isn't it reasonable to assume that trusting human beings with the power to execute stealth no-knock warrants in the middle of the night is trusting them with such a power? What could be more one-sided than a surprise attack by five to seven armed men of unknown origin who are protected by cop-killer statutes if you shoot at them in self-defense and live to tell about it? Then there's the matter of "exigent circumstances" posted by Streck-Fu, where a warrant isn't even required. What, are we going to trust the NSA next? The TSA? Any arm of the government that has demonstrated they can have their way with you with little to no repercussions?

Uncle Jimbo at Blackfive, a QP, has long maintained that the vast majority of SWAT departments simply don't train enough in CQC to be trusted to conduct raids. I'm inclined to believe him.

[Ape Man]

Originally Posted by ironyoshi

Right, this was one of those steroid-pumping 95-year old studs. The funny thing is, every time a death from mostly-nonlethal devices (tazers, beanbags) gets in the news, someone will always be saying "but if it weren't for those things, the cops would have to physically subdue the individual, which is more dangerous." So how is four or five grown men holding this senior citizen down more dangerous than shooting him with a beanbag gun behind a riot shield?

You would be amazed at how afraid people are of old geezers. I was once trying to do a job on a mental ward with a partner and this old guy who could barely walk did not like the fact that we were going to work in his room. So he started to attack us. The female therapy aid who was escorting us walked away from us. I could not believe it. What were we supposed to do when we were expressly told that it was our jobs if we so much as touched a client?

As it turns out, she was going to get a the only male therapy aids on the unit to restrain him because she did not feel that she could handle the problem. Back then I was young and naive and thought that females had the same job title they did the same work. Now I know better.

I will say that the old guy was certifiably insane though. The guy who was working with me could bench around 400 pounds and I was young and small but I could still bench over 200 pounds. Did not matter to him. He could barely stand but he was swinging for all he was worth.

[TacOfficer]

Ironyoshi,

I really won't argue the facts of this one. because I don't know all the facts. The officers are going to have to do a lot of justifying.

But your argument is that what a person reads in an opinion piece is more factual than an on-scene witness that saw what happened and should be held accountable to a journalist's perspective.
Got it.

Oh and by the way, as to your perception of exigent circumstances: if you call the police to respond to your home for a burglary or home invasion etc. I hope the officer waits for a search warrant while the occupants within fend for themselves.

Pray the judge ain't sleepin'. It could be a long night.

It's not a perfect system, absolutely, mistakes happen and judgement calls will be questioned. Lets not get the tin foil hats out just yet.

TO

[MR2]

Let's try and remember that the police are (supposed to be) the good guys.

It is sad when the citizens forget that, even sadder when the police forget it, and all will be lost if the citizens decide that the police are no longer.


Also remember, we are all imperfect beings. Citizen or police, we all have the ability to fuck up - and all too often exercise that ability.

[ironyoshi]

Originally Posted by TacOfficer

Ironyoshi,

I really won't argue the facts of this one. because I don't know all the facts. The officers are going to have to do a lot of justifying.

But your argument is that what a person reads in an opinion piece is more factual than an on-scene witness that saw what happened and should be held accountable to a journalist's perspective.
Got it.

Well, the staff were on-scene witnesses according to what's been reported so far, and they aren't vouching for the police. Having said that, it's true that we weren't there. I'll be waiting for the outcome of the inquiries.

Oh and by the way, as to your perception of exigent circumstances: if you call the police to respond to your home for a burglary or home invasion etc. I hope the officer waits for a search warrant while the occupants within fend for themselves.

That's not what Streck-Fu's article was about.

It's not a perfect system, absolutely, mistakes happen and judgement calls will be questioned. Lets not get the tin foil hats out just yet.

TO

It's not a perfect system, but I question whether we have to just live with its current version. It seems like it's allowing for a lot of abuses that can't readily be rectified if you don't want to fight lengthly court battles.

I have met many good cops, and I am certainly not adversarial with police when I talk to them. But the culture will eventually suborn the individual, not the other way around. And the culture seems to be changing. 80,000 paramilitary raids in 2001 compared to a few hundred in 1972. That doesn't sound good.