The NEW LEO Encounters... - Page 7
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 71

Thread: The NEW LEO Encounters...

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    783
    Perhaps this thread should die now (no pun intended) but here is a decent article outlining a brief history of constabulary militarization and some of the egregious misconduct of various police forces around the country. When SWAT teams are the first response there is little room for things to actually improve.

    Rise of the Warrior Cop - WSJ.com
    “You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you mad.” – Aldous Huxley

  2.   
  3. #62
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,348
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Lakeland Man View Post
    I agree with most of your reasoning. However, a couple of points. LEO's take an oath to serve and protect the public. The general public, including gun owners and carriers do not.
    As I expected, you forgot about the constitution. Why is it that police have forgotten about the constitution?! Is this not a perfect example of what we are trying to say to you LEOs?

    FYI, there are more than 26 million veterans. We all took the oath to protect and defend the constitution. That includes the bill of rights.

    Amendment V

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
    The militarization of police, coupled with the continuing trend of disregarding the constitutional rights of the citizens who pay their salaries is depriving hundreds of people of their life, liberty and property. Look at the no knock raids at wrong addresses where dogs are shot, law abiding marines responding to a broken window, kicked in door and armed masked intruders are gunned down and left to die, property is damaged (look at the police response to Dorner incident) and murder attempted.

  4. #63
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,348
    Blog Entries
    2
    Some reading for you lakelandman and ksdeputy.


    Bill of Rights Transcript Text

  5. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Lowcountry of South Carolina
    Posts
    2,039
    Quote Originally Posted by MI .45 View Post
    Here is the latest example of out-of-control police: Lyons: Police raid felt like home invasion | HeraldTribune.com
    With regards to the unprovoked home invasions by police, I would refer you to verse IV
    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
    Following the above, how can they get the wrong address? If we have judges authorizing search warrants for ENTIRE apartment complexes, then they need to have a little constitutional training too.
    Chief

  6. #65
    TCD, if you are going to quote me, don't take it out of context please.

  7. #66
    Regarding lack of knowledge by LEOs. I really believe that they should have (and be required to have) a higher level of responsibility concerning laws covering firearms. It is in an area of interaction where deadly force or serious violation of rights is most likely to ensue because of a misunderstanding of the rules. As gun owners we have (or should have) a much greater duty to to avoid confrontational situations because of the level of possible response.

    Regarding the meeting NavyLTC talked about in post 12 of this thread; I was also there. The police chief and sheriff both made incorrect answers to questions. To a room full of Democrats who were expecting and anti-gun meeting. Someone from the from the Brady bunch was supposed to be there. The meeting was organized by a ladies Democratic organization. Some people got up and left when they saw guns. I have no idea how many guns were there that they could not see. I am sure about one.

    The problem is that sort of group getting bad information is then going out and propagating it. I believe the LEOs doing the presentations really had an obligation to have taken some time to re-familiarize themselves with pertinent law. It really is not that hard in this state. The material is readily available and not mind blunting to read. The good parts are even fairly short. And the people there will now believe in bad information because they got it right from their senior LEO.

    If we need a new gun law, it should be to simply mandate LEOs are current on firearm laws in effect in their jurisdiction. With a rider that mandates authentic and factual training as part of all school curriculums. Things like is going on now about guns would probably not exist if the unwashed masses (and those who shower regularly in Perrier water), actually knew the truth instead of the fictional pap put out by the lying scum suckers (many of whom frequently shower in Perrier water) and who have aircraft under their control to move about spreading the word.

  8. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Posts
    3,800
    A rant..........

    One thing that needs to be understood is that he who has a gun is equally as powerful as the other guy who has a gun.

    But..

    He who has a gun is much more powerful than he who does NOT have a gun...

    Quotations from Mao Tse Tung — Chapter 5

    Every Communist must grasp the truth; "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

    "Problems of War and Strategy" (November 6, 1938), Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 224.

    I would suggest that it isn't just political power that grows out of the barrel of a gun but the gun represents the power to control.

    What does that have to do with cops? Well... the goal of a political tyrant is to control the masses using the force of law and the goal of a cop is to control the behavior of individuals by enforcing the law. Both goals are much easier to achieve if no one but the tyrant or the cop has the power represented by the gun. Not to mention it is safer for the tyrant or the cop if no one other than themselves have guns. After all... when no one but tyrants and cops are allowed to have guns then... anyone not a tyrant or a cop who has a gun is automatically considered to be a threat to the cop or tyrant and will be dealt with accordingly. The fewer guns in the hands of anyone who is not a tyrant or a cop makes it safer for the tyrant and the cop to exert control. Please note the goal is fewer guns... not fewer criminals with guns but just fewer guns for everyone except the tyrant and the cops.

    And if the cops can spread misinformation about firearms laws that results in people not carrying guns because the cop said it wasn't legal or was legal but is not a good idea then the agenda of limiting the amount of guns the cops have to deal with is achieved.

    Quite often what matters isn't what the actual law is but what matters is what people can be convinced the law is supposed to mean.... according to the agenda of the one talking about those laws of course.

    End of rant... please resume normal discussion.

  9. #68
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    2,837
    Quote Originally Posted by dad45acp View Post
    Your conclusions are based on job interviews...and not getting the job? Therefore you assume that you are not considered badass enough to roll with the popo and that what....you're too honest or something? Playing devils advocate here but maybe you really suck at interviews versus some other hidden LEO society looking for an army of mindless, abusive, elitist buttholes. Didnt know if that had crossed your frontal lobe or not...

    Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone
    Are you still here? I heard you split.


    Sent from behind enemy lines.

  10. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlesMorrison View Post
    Are you still here? I heard you split.


    Sent from behind enemy lines.
    Nah.

    Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone

  11. Lakeland Man,

    I think you have it right, the bad encounters are always reported and the good ones never are.

    I have not had a bad one since high school (and everybody in town knew he was a jerk).

    The last two involved the protocol for SC (during official encounters while carrying concealed, notify UNLESS you are in an area where no CC permit is required).

    The first time, I reported a man lurking around a house I knew to be vacant and then running off while wearing heavy boots (and I knew he was not out for his morning run because of the beard, hair and scrawny body; this was no SEAL home on leave).

    Two years later, it was a suspicious car parked on my long driveway (over 800').

    Both times, presenting the permit was optional because I was on my land and it was a non-issue when I advised him anyway.

    The last time occurred while I helped rescue an owl (not one of the endangered species, but I did not know it at the time).

    Again, a non-issue. He looked at the permit, and just asked for the details of my report.

    I have been stopped at a DUI check point, at night no less, and handed out my driver's license, insurance, and CW permit. He said "What 'ya carry?" I said "Sig .40 caliber P239, at 3 o'clock in a El Paso Saddlery IWB holster." He said: "I am a Glock man myself." I said, "Oh, am I going to need a lawyer?" He said "Nope, we are only doing drunks and the uninsured motorists tonight! See ya!" And that was it. No drama at all.

    This is the only time I have ever written about this.

    Of course, the secret to having no problems is refraining from juvenile behavior like street racing, keeping my insurance paid, not drinking and driving, not doing capers that involve travel in the small hours in the morning, maintaining my vehicles, and general behaving myself so LEOs have something better to do.

    Dealing with someone they stop with an attitude has to be light up their threat detection board.

    I think there is plenty of indication that most of these incidents just escalate from bad attitudes of the civilian involved. Add a long shift, working alone in the middle of the night and anyone can imagine that the last straw is just one comment away.

    My $.02.

    KLW






    Quote Originally Posted by Lakeland Man View Post
    I agree with most of your reasoning. However, a couple of points. LEO's take an oath to serve and protect the public. The general public, including gun owners and carriers do not. Do some of those LEO's violate that oath? Yes. But not all and I would say not most. I don't argue that there some bad cops. What I object to is the seemingly pervasive feeling among some members here that most or all cops are bad. When I was an LEO, I could count on the fingers of one hand the number of my peers who were less than honorable, and I would still have 4 fingers left over.

    I carry to protect myself from the darker elements of society. However, everyone I pass is not suspect. I don't mistrust all the people I come into contact with. I don't act as if they all have intentions of harming me and my family. I don't want to live in that kind of a paranoid state. I am ready for confrontation at all times but I don't expect everyone to be the bad guy. So far, this has served me well.

    When you are standing in line at the grocery store, do you expect the cashier to whip out a knife and attack you? Unless it's my ex-wife, I don't. Am I ready for such an attack? I like to think so. But readiness and fear or paranoia are two different things.

    How many thousands of times a day do you suppose LE come into contact with the public? And how many of those times do you suppose the LEO is wrong or doing something they're not supposed to. I don't have numbers or statistics, but I'd be willing to wager that the percentage is statistically insignificant. However some posters here seem to feel the reverse is the norm. They judge all by the actions of a very few. Once again I say that that is Brady reasoning.
    Last edited by klw; 08-02-2013 at 04:03 PM. Reason: clarity

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast