Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Attachments:
Attachments:
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
GetM4th
()
Date: July 10, 2013 09:15AM
Lawsuit: Police seize homes, arrest owners to investigate neighbor
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/05/lawsuit-police-seize-homes-arrest-owners-to-investigate-neighbor/#ixzz2YeDxuC9O
Police call a homeowner and want to use his home for a tactical advantage on investigating a neighbor. He says no. Police plan to go over there anyway and break in, if he refuses and does so.
Wow....I never thought I would actually see the day where there was such a cut and dry violation of a person's rights, who wasn't even involved in an incident.
"Police officers contacted Anthony Mitchell on July 10, 2011, with a request to use his house as a lookout while investigating his neighbor. When Mitchell told police that he did not wish to be involved, the complaint alleges, police decided they would use the residence anyway.
According to Courthouse News Service, the police department decided that if Mitchell refused to leave or open the door, officers would force their way in and arrest him.
Mitchell claims this is exactly what happened. First officers “smashed open” Mitchell’s door with a “metal ram” after he did not immediately open it himself. He then “curled on the floor of his living room, with his hands over his face,” as the police shot Mitchell and his dog — which the family claims did not attack the officers — several times with “pepperball” rounds.
Pepperball is a projectile containing chemical irritant pepper spray, which is released upon impact.
Afterward, Mitchell was arrested for “obstructing a police officer.”
As usual, when I see blatant police abuse like this, I go over to Forums.officer.com, which is LEO site, to see what cops have to say. Can't even find mention of it.
--------------------------------------
The Artist Formerly Known As GetM@th
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/05/lawsuit-police-seize-homes-arrest-owners-to-investigate-neighbor/#ixzz2YeDxuC9O
Police call a homeowner and want to use his home for a tactical advantage on investigating a neighbor. He says no. Police plan to go over there anyway and break in, if he refuses and does so.
Wow....I never thought I would actually see the day where there was such a cut and dry violation of a person's rights, who wasn't even involved in an incident.
"Police officers contacted Anthony Mitchell on July 10, 2011, with a request to use his house as a lookout while investigating his neighbor. When Mitchell told police that he did not wish to be involved, the complaint alleges, police decided they would use the residence anyway.
According to Courthouse News Service, the police department decided that if Mitchell refused to leave or open the door, officers would force their way in and arrest him.
Mitchell claims this is exactly what happened. First officers “smashed open” Mitchell’s door with a “metal ram” after he did not immediately open it himself. He then “curled on the floor of his living room, with his hands over his face,” as the police shot Mitchell and his dog — which the family claims did not attack the officers — several times with “pepperball” rounds.
Pepperball is a projectile containing chemical irritant pepper spray, which is released upon impact.
Afterward, Mitchell was arrested for “obstructing a police officer.”
As usual, when I see blatant police abuse like this, I go over to Forums.officer.com, which is LEO site, to see what cops have to say. Can't even find mention of it.
--------------------------------------
The Artist Formerly Known As GetM@th
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
So?
()
Date: July 10, 2013 09:23AM
Attachments:
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Occupying Power
()
Date: July 10, 2013 09:37AM
Obey police commands, citizen, and you will not be harmed.
ZOG
ZOG
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
So?
()
Date: July 10, 2013 09:41AM
Attachments:
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
ronny203
()
Date: July 10, 2013 10:02AM
I wish this happened to me ,dude about to get a couple million dollars from the lawsuit
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Mr GFR
()
Date: July 10, 2013 02:59PM
Hhhhmmm...from reading the linked article I get the feeling this was a one sided account of what happened. I get the sense there is a lot more to the story then what is in the article such as this was not some random "investigation" of domestic violence as they would want you to believe. This looks to have been some type of barricade type situation as the police do not set up command posts or have negotiation teams for "investigations".
I think they would be better off suing under a different Amendment like maybe the 4th as it seems the police were seizing property, even if temporary, then the 3rd. Police are not soldiers. It would be interesting to see how far this makes it.
I think they would be better off suing under a different Amendment like maybe the 4th as it seems the police were seizing property, even if temporary, then the 3rd. Police are not soldiers. It would be interesting to see how far this makes it.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Liberal Logic 76
()
Date: July 10, 2013 03:15PM
Mr GFR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hhhhmmm...from reading the linked article I get
> the feeling this was a one sided account of what
> happened. I get the sense there is a lot more to
> the story then what is in the article such as this
> was not some random "investigation" of domestic
> violence as they would want you to believe. This
> looks to have been some type of barricade type
> situation as the police do not set up command
> posts or have negotiation teams for
> "investigations".
It really doesnt matter what kind of investigation it is, unless theres WMDs in the house next door (in which case a special forces team should be used anyway) if you tell the police no they cant come in your house.
All charges were dropped against the family and the police nor the state are really challenging the account of the incident so it doesnt seem to be inaccurate in terms of the actions the officers took.
The constitutional challenge may be a bit of a stretch though they were acting like soldiers in a war zone, but they without a doubt broke a ton of laws with their actions.
The real shame is not a single thing will happen to any of those officers and theyll all still be on the job abusing their power.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hhhhmmm...from reading the linked article I get
> the feeling this was a one sided account of what
> happened. I get the sense there is a lot more to
> the story then what is in the article such as this
> was not some random "investigation" of domestic
> violence as they would want you to believe. This
> looks to have been some type of barricade type
> situation as the police do not set up command
> posts or have negotiation teams for
> "investigations".
It really doesnt matter what kind of investigation it is, unless theres WMDs in the house next door (in which case a special forces team should be used anyway) if you tell the police no they cant come in your house.
All charges were dropped against the family and the police nor the state are really challenging the account of the incident so it doesnt seem to be inaccurate in terms of the actions the officers took.
The constitutional challenge may be a bit of a stretch though they were acting like soldiers in a war zone, but they without a doubt broke a ton of laws with their actions.
The real shame is not a single thing will happen to any of those officers and theyll all still be on the job abusing their power.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Hay Zeus
()
Date: July 10, 2013 03:29PM
For a while I used to think it was good thing Police Depts were adopting paramilitary tactics and ethos. However, its becoming clear this is not a good practice. More and more reports are coming out about the use of excessive force resulting in the harassment of citizens.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
SWAT 'em
()
Date: July 10, 2013 03:58PM
Hay Zeus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For a while I used to think it was good thing
> Police Depts were adopting paramilitary tactics
> and ethos. However, its becoming clear this is not
> a good practice. More and more reports are coming
> out about the use of excessive force resulting in
> the harassment of citizens.
They've gone way overboard with that stuff. Great for the guys who actually do need to be trained that way, but everyone having anything to do with LE or security now seems to think and act like they're in some elite SWAT unit.
-------------------------------------------------------
> For a while I used to think it was good thing
> Police Depts were adopting paramilitary tactics
> and ethos. However, its becoming clear this is not
> a good practice. More and more reports are coming
> out about the use of excessive force resulting in
> the harassment of citizens.
They've gone way overboard with that stuff. Great for the guys who actually do need to be trained that way, but everyone having anything to do with LE or security now seems to think and act like they're in some elite SWAT unit.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Mr GFR
()
Date: July 10, 2013 10:38PM
Liberal Logic 76 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr GFR Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hhhhmmm...from reading the linked article I get
> > the feeling this was a one sided account of
> what
> > happened. I get the sense there is a lot more
> to
> > the story then what is in the article such as
> this
> > was not some random "investigation" of domestic
> > violence as they would want you to believe.
> This
> > looks to have been some type of barricade type
> > situation as the police do not set up command
> > posts or have negotiation teams for
> > "investigations".
>
> It really doesnt matter what kind of investigation
> it is, unless theres WMDs in the house next door
> (in which case a special forces team should be
> used anyway) if you tell the police no they cant
> come in your house.
>
> All charges were dropped against the family and
> the police nor the state are really challenging
> the account of the incident so it doesnt seem to
> be inaccurate in terms of the actions the officers
> took.
>
> The constitutional challenge may be a bit of a
> stretch though they were acting like soldiers in a
> war zone, but they without a doubt broke a ton of
> laws with their actions.
>
> The real shame is not a single thing will happen
> to any of those officers and theyll all still be
> on the job abusing their power.
I never said the police did not do something wrong. All I said there was a lot more to the story then what was being told.
A "war zone"? Dude what have you been smoking.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr GFR Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hhhhmmm...from reading the linked article I get
> > the feeling this was a one sided account of
> what
> > happened. I get the sense there is a lot more
> to
> > the story then what is in the article such as
> this
> > was not some random "investigation" of domestic
> > violence as they would want you to believe.
> This
> > looks to have been some type of barricade type
> > situation as the police do not set up command
> > posts or have negotiation teams for
> > "investigations".
>
> It really doesnt matter what kind of investigation
> it is, unless theres WMDs in the house next door
> (in which case a special forces team should be
> used anyway) if you tell the police no they cant
> come in your house.
>
> All charges were dropped against the family and
> the police nor the state are really challenging
> the account of the incident so it doesnt seem to
> be inaccurate in terms of the actions the officers
> took.
>
> The constitutional challenge may be a bit of a
> stretch though they were acting like soldiers in a
> war zone, but they without a doubt broke a ton of
> laws with their actions.
>
> The real shame is not a single thing will happen
> to any of those officers and theyll all still be
> on the job abusing their power.
I never said the police did not do something wrong. All I said there was a lot more to the story then what was being told.
A "war zone"? Dude what have you been smoking.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
cX9bY
()
Date: July 10, 2013 10:48PM
if the guy had a pizza-cutter in his home?, then they had to go military style on his ass..........surprised they did not kill him immediately
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Liberal Logic 76
()
Date: July 10, 2013 11:15PM
Mr GFR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I never said the police did not do something
> wrong. All I said there was a lot more to the
> story then what was being told.
Theres nothing more relevant to the story since they dont dispute anything.
> A "war zone"? Dude what have you been smoking.
Yes confiscating someones house and attacking the then detaining them for not giving up their home is what you do in war zones, not what the police should ever do.
If they want to be in the military so badly they should go join.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I never said the police did not do something
> wrong. All I said there was a lot more to the
> story then what was being told.
Theres nothing more relevant to the story since they dont dispute anything.
> A "war zone"? Dude what have you been smoking.
Yes confiscating someones house and attacking the then detaining them for not giving up their home is what you do in war zones, not what the police should ever do.
If they want to be in the military so badly they should go join.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Lt Hunter
()
Date: July 10, 2013 11:38PM
Hay Zeus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For a while I used to think it was good thing
> Police Depts were adopting paramilitary tactics
> and ethos. However, its becoming clear this is not
> a good practice. More and more reports are coming
> out about the use of excessive force resulting in
> the harassment of citizens.
The Metro cops look like they are ready to land at Normandy. They carry sidearms and rifles plus what looks like hundreds of extra rounds of ammo.
-------------------------------------------------------
> For a while I used to think it was good thing
> Police Depts were adopting paramilitary tactics
> and ethos. However, its becoming clear this is not
> a good practice. More and more reports are coming
> out about the use of excessive force resulting in
> the harassment of citizens.
The Metro cops look like they are ready to land at Normandy. They carry sidearms and rifles plus what looks like hundreds of extra rounds of ammo.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Mr GFR
()
Date: July 11, 2013 12:11AM
Lt Hunter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hay Zeus Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > For a while I used to think it was good thing
> > Police Depts were adopting paramilitary tactics
> > and ethos. However, its becoming clear this is
> not
> > a good practice. More and more reports are
> coming
> > out about the use of excessive force resulting
> in
> > the harassment of citizens.
>
> The Metro cops look like they are ready to land at
> Normandy. They carry sidearms and rifles plus what
> looks like hundreds of extra rounds of ammo.
Total over kill. I mean shit, what could ever happen on a mass transit system or in a train station. Ever heard of a place called Mumbia? But wait, that could never happen here right?
The metro does what they call anti terrorism proactive patrols. These are when you see officers carrying rifles and wearing tactical vest.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hay Zeus Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > For a while I used to think it was good thing
> > Police Depts were adopting paramilitary tactics
> > and ethos. However, its becoming clear this is
> not
> > a good practice. More and more reports are
> coming
> > out about the use of excessive force resulting
> in
> > the harassment of citizens.
>
> The Metro cops look like they are ready to land at
> Normandy. They carry sidearms and rifles plus what
> looks like hundreds of extra rounds of ammo.
Total over kill. I mean shit, what could ever happen on a mass transit system or in a train station. Ever heard of a place called Mumbia? But wait, that could never happen here right?
The metro does what they call anti terrorism proactive patrols. These are when you see officers carrying rifles and wearing tactical vest.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
GetM4th
()
Date: July 11, 2013 08:31AM
Liberal Logic 76 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr GFR Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I never said the police did not do something
> > wrong. All I said there was a lot more to the
> > story then what was being told.
>
> Theres nothing more relevant to the story since
> they dont dispute anything.
>
> > A "war zone"? Dude what have you been smoking.
>
> Yes confiscating someones house and attacking the
> then detaining them for not giving up their home
> is what you do in war zones, not what the police
> should ever do.
>
> If they want to be in the military so badly they
> should go join.
That's the problem. They are already of the mindset that they ARE military. When I was growing up the only people that ever got to call anyone a civilian, is someone who was in the military. The police now use that term, as if they are any less of a "civilian" than anyone else.
It is so bad I saw a bumper sticker once. That had a soldier on one side in full military gear with the caption, protecting the US abroad. And on the other side, a cop in para-military garb with the caption, protecting the US at home. This is bad!
With all the military equipment being passed around since 911, cops DO think they are military and not civilians. It used to be that most police never ever fired a round in anger, much less ever pulled their service revolver (how times have changed) during their entire careers. Now we routinely see cops pulling their guns at the SLIGHTEST provocation.
--------------------------------------
The Artist Formerly Known As GetM@th
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr GFR Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I never said the police did not do something
> > wrong. All I said there was a lot more to the
> > story then what was being told.
>
> Theres nothing more relevant to the story since
> they dont dispute anything.
>
> > A "war zone"? Dude what have you been smoking.
>
> Yes confiscating someones house and attacking the
> then detaining them for not giving up their home
> is what you do in war zones, not what the police
> should ever do.
>
> If they want to be in the military so badly they
> should go join.
That's the problem. They are already of the mindset that they ARE military. When I was growing up the only people that ever got to call anyone a civilian, is someone who was in the military. The police now use that term, as if they are any less of a "civilian" than anyone else.
It is so bad I saw a bumper sticker once. That had a soldier on one side in full military gear with the caption, protecting the US abroad. And on the other side, a cop in para-military garb with the caption, protecting the US at home. This is bad!
With all the military equipment being passed around since 911, cops DO think they are military and not civilians. It used to be that most police never ever fired a round in anger, much less ever pulled their service revolver (how times have changed) during their entire careers. Now we routinely see cops pulling their guns at the SLIGHTEST provocation.
--------------------------------------
The Artist Formerly Known As GetM@th
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
GetM4th
()
Date: July 11, 2013 08:45AM
Mr GFR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lt Hunter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hay Zeus Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > For a while I used to think it was good thing
> > > Police Depts were adopting paramilitary
> tactics
> > > and ethos. However, its becoming clear this
> is
> > not
> > > a good practice. More and more reports are
> > coming
> > > out about the use of excessive force
> resulting
> > in
> > > the harassment of citizens.
> >
> > The Metro cops look like they are ready to land
> at
> > Normandy. They carry sidearms and rifles plus
> what
> > looks like hundreds of extra rounds of ammo.
>
>
> Total over kill. I mean shit, what could ever
> happen on a mass transit system or in a train
> station. Ever heard of a place called Mumbia? But
> wait, that could never happen here right?
>
> The metro does what they call anti terrorism
> proactive patrols. These are when you see officers
> carrying rifles and wearing tactical vest.
You know, after the Patriot Act was passed I took a lot of heat because I said that the terrorists had won. When asked why, Osama BL had given an interview long before the public had heard of him, where he told the reporter, that his aim was to have the US destroy itself. He didn't need to. One little nudge in the right direction and it would topple itself. It's been downhill ever since and the man has been out of the loop for a decade and now dead.
Every time our rights are eroded, it's because of our "safety" and people allow it because they fear incidents like Mumbai. What is the aim of terrorism, to effect political and social change through fear. They indeed won a long time ago. I feel truly sorry for the Millennials and later gens. They never knew what a truly free country this was prior to 9/11.
--------------------------------------
The Artist Formerly Known As GetM@th
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lt Hunter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hay Zeus Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > For a while I used to think it was good thing
> > > Police Depts were adopting paramilitary
> tactics
> > > and ethos. However, its becoming clear this
> is
> > not
> > > a good practice. More and more reports are
> > coming
> > > out about the use of excessive force
> resulting
> > in
> > > the harassment of citizens.
> >
> > The Metro cops look like they are ready to land
> at
> > Normandy. They carry sidearms and rifles plus
> what
> > looks like hundreds of extra rounds of ammo.
>
>
> Total over kill. I mean shit, what could ever
> happen on a mass transit system or in a train
> station. Ever heard of a place called Mumbia? But
> wait, that could never happen here right?
>
> The metro does what they call anti terrorism
> proactive patrols. These are when you see officers
> carrying rifles and wearing tactical vest.
You know, after the Patriot Act was passed I took a lot of heat because I said that the terrorists had won. When asked why, Osama BL had given an interview long before the public had heard of him, where he told the reporter, that his aim was to have the US destroy itself. He didn't need to. One little nudge in the right direction and it would topple itself. It's been downhill ever since and the man has been out of the loop for a decade and now dead.
Every time our rights are eroded, it's because of our "safety" and people allow it because they fear incidents like Mumbai. What is the aim of terrorism, to effect political and social change through fear. They indeed won a long time ago. I feel truly sorry for the Millennials and later gens. They never knew what a truly free country this was prior to 9/11.
--------------------------------------
The Artist Formerly Known As GetM@th
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
WingNut
()
Date: July 11, 2013 08:52AM
Deport about 75% of arrivals from Islamo shitholes that are hotspots and incubators of fundamentalist wackiness.
Use a zero tolerance policy against overstayed visas, immigrants with even minor criminal records or having associations with radical mosques here. Including the one in Falls Church.
Sure, America breeds our own terrorists, but there is a big difference between someone BORN in this country going bad and blinding importing someone from a backward culture that has a strong possibility of going bad.
Secure our borders, Free our phones.
Use a zero tolerance policy against overstayed visas, immigrants with even minor criminal records or having associations with radical mosques here. Including the one in Falls Church.
Sure, America breeds our own terrorists, but there is a big difference between someone BORN in this country going bad and blinding importing someone from a backward culture that has a strong possibility of going bad.
Secure our borders, Free our phones.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Young Curmudgeon
()
Date: July 11, 2013 12:05PM
GetM4th Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> With all the military equipment being passed
> around since 911, cops DO think they are military
> and not civilians. It used to be that most police
> never ever fired a round in anger, much less ever
> pulled their service revolver (how times have
> changed) during their entire careers. Now we
> routinely see cops pulling their guns at the
> SLIGHTEST provocation.
I know a guy who's been with FCPD for nearly 15 years. He's drawn his gun exactly once, and that was during a response to a bank robbery with a team of officers. Most officers will never fire their guns in the line of duty... or at least it used to be that way.
The job of the average officer is to keep order. Only SWAT teams should have anything close to military gear.
_____________
We are all Eesh.
-------------------------------------------------------
> With all the military equipment being passed
> around since 911, cops DO think they are military
> and not civilians. It used to be that most police
> never ever fired a round in anger, much less ever
> pulled their service revolver (how times have
> changed) during their entire careers. Now we
> routinely see cops pulling their guns at the
> SLIGHTEST provocation.
I know a guy who's been with FCPD for nearly 15 years. He's drawn his gun exactly once, and that was during a response to a bank robbery with a team of officers. Most officers will never fire their guns in the line of duty... or at least it used to be that way.
The job of the average officer is to keep order. Only SWAT teams should have anything close to military gear.
_____________
We are all Eesh.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Liberal Logic 76
()
Date: July 11, 2013 01:50PM
GetM4th Wrote:
> That's the problem. They are already of the
> mindset that they ARE military. When I was
> growing up the only people that ever got to call
> anyone a civilian, is someone who was in the
> military. The police now use that term, as if
> they are any less of a "civilian" than anyone
> else.
I couldnt agree more, power is quickly corrupting the police. They do act and think theyre the military yet their training is a complete joke compared to the military. Theyre without a doubt civilians, a large percentage of them could never meet military standards.
> It is so bad I saw a bumper sticker once. That
> had a soldier on one side in full military gear
> with the caption, protecting the US abroad. And
> on the other side, a cop in para-military garb
> with the caption, protecting the US at home. This
> is bad!
Who ever had that is a complete idiot. If you want the respect of people for being military join the military. That had to have been a cop bumper sticker, no self respecting military member would lower themselves like that
> With all the military equipment being passed
> around since 911, cops DO think they are military
> and not civilians. It used to be that most police
> never ever fired a round in anger, much less ever
> pulled their service revolver (how times have
> changed) during their entire careers. Now we
> routinely see cops pulling their guns at the
> SLIGHTEST provocation.
The problem isnt their gear, they do have good reason for rifles and everything now. Look at the LA bank robbery where they had to grab guns from a gun store trying to bring those guys down.
The real problem is both their hiring standards and the biggest problem is they have no accountability at all. The new hiring standards weed anyone out thats done anything ever for local police, that leaves you with liars who dont care so they dont disclose anything and people that have never done anything and dont have a clue how to react to anything.
But accountability is by far the biggest issue. Its almost impossible to get fired as a cop because of unions. Even if you do get fired its even harder to ever get prosecuted even if you say yes I gunned him down youre probably just getting let go. As long as they know theyre untouchable because of unions they will get more abusive as time goes on.
Take this case for example absolutely nothing will happen to those officers for what they did. If they got fired for things like that they would think twice before trying things like that.
> That's the problem. They are already of the
> mindset that they ARE military. When I was
> growing up the only people that ever got to call
> anyone a civilian, is someone who was in the
> military. The police now use that term, as if
> they are any less of a "civilian" than anyone
> else.
I couldnt agree more, power is quickly corrupting the police. They do act and think theyre the military yet their training is a complete joke compared to the military. Theyre without a doubt civilians, a large percentage of them could never meet military standards.
> It is so bad I saw a bumper sticker once. That
> had a soldier on one side in full military gear
> with the caption, protecting the US abroad. And
> on the other side, a cop in para-military garb
> with the caption, protecting the US at home. This
> is bad!
Who ever had that is a complete idiot. If you want the respect of people for being military join the military. That had to have been a cop bumper sticker, no self respecting military member would lower themselves like that
> With all the military equipment being passed
> around since 911, cops DO think they are military
> and not civilians. It used to be that most police
> never ever fired a round in anger, much less ever
> pulled their service revolver (how times have
> changed) during their entire careers. Now we
> routinely see cops pulling their guns at the
> SLIGHTEST provocation.
The problem isnt their gear, they do have good reason for rifles and everything now. Look at the LA bank robbery where they had to grab guns from a gun store trying to bring those guys down.
The real problem is both their hiring standards and the biggest problem is they have no accountability at all. The new hiring standards weed anyone out thats done anything ever for local police, that leaves you with liars who dont care so they dont disclose anything and people that have never done anything and dont have a clue how to react to anything.
But accountability is by far the biggest issue. Its almost impossible to get fired as a cop because of unions. Even if you do get fired its even harder to ever get prosecuted even if you say yes I gunned him down youre probably just getting let go. As long as they know theyre untouchable because of unions they will get more abusive as time goes on.
Take this case for example absolutely nothing will happen to those officers for what they did. If they got fired for things like that they would think twice before trying things like that.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Mr GFR
()
Date: July 11, 2013 03:28PM
Liberal Logic 76 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The problem isnt their gear, they do have good
> reason for rifles and everything now. Look at the
> LA bank robbery where they had to grab guns from a
> gun store trying to bring those guys down.
Agreed
> The real problem is both their hiring standards
> and the biggest problem is they have no
> accountability at all. The new hiring standards
> weed anyone out thats done anything ever for local
> police, that leaves you with liars who dont care
> so they dont disclose anything and people that
> have never done anything and dont have a clue how
> to react to anything.
Not sure what you are trying to say here. You sound like somebody that tried getting a job with the police and got turned down.
I do agree the hiring standards should be higher then they are but you can blame the liberal political correctness for this. Most police departments can not even give a standard written test anymore because requiring somebody to pass with a 70% score on a basic reading comprehension test is bias against minorities.
> But accountability is by far the biggest issue.
> Its almost impossible to get fired as a cop
> because of unions. Even if you do get fired its
> even harder to ever get prosecuted even if you say
> yes I gunned him down youre probably just getting
> let go. As long as they know theyre untouchable
> because of unions they will get more abusive as
> time goes on.
You do know Virginia is a right to work state. The Unions here in public safety has very little pull. Vast majority of officers I have met who work in this area are not even members of the local unions.
> Take this case for example absolutely nothing will
> happen to those officers for what they did. If
> they got fired for things like that they would
> think twice before trying things like that.
All the facts are not known to us so hard to say what should happen. Based upon what is in the article, the officers should be in trouble but again there is nothing here from the officers explaining their side of what they did. It would be interesting to hear from them why they did what they did before deciding their fate.
-------------------------------------------------------
> The problem isnt their gear, they do have good
> reason for rifles and everything now. Look at the
> LA bank robbery where they had to grab guns from a
> gun store trying to bring those guys down.
Agreed
> The real problem is both their hiring standards
> and the biggest problem is they have no
> accountability at all. The new hiring standards
> weed anyone out thats done anything ever for local
> police, that leaves you with liars who dont care
> so they dont disclose anything and people that
> have never done anything and dont have a clue how
> to react to anything.
Not sure what you are trying to say here. You sound like somebody that tried getting a job with the police and got turned down.
I do agree the hiring standards should be higher then they are but you can blame the liberal political correctness for this. Most police departments can not even give a standard written test anymore because requiring somebody to pass with a 70% score on a basic reading comprehension test is bias against minorities.
> But accountability is by far the biggest issue.
> Its almost impossible to get fired as a cop
> because of unions. Even if you do get fired its
> even harder to ever get prosecuted even if you say
> yes I gunned him down youre probably just getting
> let go. As long as they know theyre untouchable
> because of unions they will get more abusive as
> time goes on.
You do know Virginia is a right to work state. The Unions here in public safety has very little pull. Vast majority of officers I have met who work in this area are not even members of the local unions.
> Take this case for example absolutely nothing will
> happen to those officers for what they did. If
> they got fired for things like that they would
> think twice before trying things like that.
All the facts are not known to us so hard to say what should happen. Based upon what is in the article, the officers should be in trouble but again there is nothing here from the officers explaining their side of what they did. It would be interesting to hear from them why they did what they did before deciding their fate.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
GetM4th
()
Date: July 11, 2013 03:46PM
Mr GFR Wrote:
> All the facts are not known to us so hard to say
> what should happen. Based upon what is in the
> article, the officers should be in trouble but
> again there is nothing here from the officers
> explaining their side of what they did. It would
> be interesting to hear from them why they did what
> they did before deciding their fate.
You won't ever hear what they have to say, because they investigate themselves.
I still don't see how anyone can get around how if he wasn't invovled, how the police could call him about occupying his house and then decide to break in if he didn't answer the door. That was apparently stipulated to in court according to the court news service.
I understand that there are plenty of police incidents that shouldn't be judged on what is presented, but I just don't see how anyone can get around this particular incident and still give them the benefit of the doubt.
They broke in and detained him, and held him until the incident was over and they (apparently) finished using his house. Somehow charging him with obstruction, because he refused an illegal search and seizure. I don't see how anyone gets around that one either.
> All the facts are not known to us so hard to say
> what should happen. Based upon what is in the
> article, the officers should be in trouble but
> again there is nothing here from the officers
> explaining their side of what they did. It would
> be interesting to hear from them why they did what
> they did before deciding their fate.
You won't ever hear what they have to say, because they investigate themselves.
I still don't see how anyone can get around how if he wasn't invovled, how the police could call him about occupying his house and then decide to break in if he didn't answer the door. That was apparently stipulated to in court according to the court news service.
I understand that there are plenty of police incidents that shouldn't be judged on what is presented, but I just don't see how anyone can get around this particular incident and still give them the benefit of the doubt.
They broke in and detained him, and held him until the incident was over and they (apparently) finished using his house. Somehow charging him with obstruction, because he refused an illegal search and seizure. I don't see how anyone gets around that one either.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Liberal Logic 76
()
Date: July 11, 2013 03:53PM
Mr GFR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not sure what you are trying to say here. You
> sound like somebody that tried getting a job with
> the police and got turned down.
Im saying theres no common sense in the process. Someone who smoked some pot 10 years earlier shouldnt be disqualified from being hired for example which does happen if your white especially a male.
No Im someone who has a masters in police policies and have seen the decline of their work with these so called improvement standards that lead to people with no common sense.
Those types of people that can get through that are why no one ever gets a break anymore and every ones goes straight to jail. Criminalizing everything is a joke and just destroys society over time.
Look around locally, you honestly want to tell me that Fairfax County is hiring the best people when last time I saw the numbers they were getting 2000 applications for every open spot. They arent, they look for every excuse to weed out those that arent in their traget hiring demographic and if you say everything disqualifies you than theres no reason not to just lie about everything which people do now all the time. Cops are supposed to be honest not the best liars.
More rural areas havent been overrun by this type of hiring yet, which is one of the reasons the police are much friendlier there and dont act like an occupying soldier.
> I do agree the hiring standards should be higher
> then they are but you can blame the liberal
> political correctness for this. Most police
> departments can not even give a standard written
> test anymore because requiring somebody to pass
> with a 70% score on a basic reading comprehension
> test is bias against minorities.
No they can give the test, the tests just a complete joke. Go take one for fun, if you cant pass it you should honestly be sent back to high school.
Diversity and affirmative action has no place in emergency service jobs. If you end up with diversity because theyre the best by all means have it, if youre lower standards to get it thats unacceptable. Fairfax county wants their officer ranks to have the exact demographics as the public for no other reason than to say that do. Thats a joke.
>
> You do know Virginia is a right to work state. The
> Unions here in public safety has very little pull.
> Vast majority of officers I have met who work in
> this area are not even members of the local
> unions.
Go check and see how many cops actually get fired here, almost none just like everywhere else. You get fired faster for not meeting ticket quotas than you do for shooting the wrong person or abusing power.
> All the facts are not known to us so hard to say
> what should happen. Based upon what is in the
> article, the officers should be in trouble but
> again there is nothing here from the officers
> explaining their side of what they did. It would
> be interesting to hear from them why they did what
> they did before deciding their fate.
Theres no explanation for their actions that shouldnt result in termination. If you did that to someone youd be in jail for a minimum of a decade. The department doesnt dispute the facts. The only defense would be that the people made everything up and nothing happened. They admit it happened.
If you forcibly take someones home, arresting them for not giving up their home, and use force while doing it you should be fired and really you should be in jail. Even worse they did it to more than one home. Thats completely unacceptable behavior by people given the power to take away peoples freedom.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not sure what you are trying to say here. You
> sound like somebody that tried getting a job with
> the police and got turned down.
Im saying theres no common sense in the process. Someone who smoked some pot 10 years earlier shouldnt be disqualified from being hired for example which does happen if your white especially a male.
No Im someone who has a masters in police policies and have seen the decline of their work with these so called improvement standards that lead to people with no common sense.
Those types of people that can get through that are why no one ever gets a break anymore and every ones goes straight to jail. Criminalizing everything is a joke and just destroys society over time.
Look around locally, you honestly want to tell me that Fairfax County is hiring the best people when last time I saw the numbers they were getting 2000 applications for every open spot. They arent, they look for every excuse to weed out those that arent in their traget hiring demographic and if you say everything disqualifies you than theres no reason not to just lie about everything which people do now all the time. Cops are supposed to be honest not the best liars.
More rural areas havent been overrun by this type of hiring yet, which is one of the reasons the police are much friendlier there and dont act like an occupying soldier.
> I do agree the hiring standards should be higher
> then they are but you can blame the liberal
> political correctness for this. Most police
> departments can not even give a standard written
> test anymore because requiring somebody to pass
> with a 70% score on a basic reading comprehension
> test is bias against minorities.
No they can give the test, the tests just a complete joke. Go take one for fun, if you cant pass it you should honestly be sent back to high school.
Diversity and affirmative action has no place in emergency service jobs. If you end up with diversity because theyre the best by all means have it, if youre lower standards to get it thats unacceptable. Fairfax county wants their officer ranks to have the exact demographics as the public for no other reason than to say that do. Thats a joke.
>
> You do know Virginia is a right to work state. The
> Unions here in public safety has very little pull.
> Vast majority of officers I have met who work in
> this area are not even members of the local
> unions.
Go check and see how many cops actually get fired here, almost none just like everywhere else. You get fired faster for not meeting ticket quotas than you do for shooting the wrong person or abusing power.
> All the facts are not known to us so hard to say
> what should happen. Based upon what is in the
> article, the officers should be in trouble but
> again there is nothing here from the officers
> explaining their side of what they did. It would
> be interesting to hear from them why they did what
> they did before deciding their fate.
Theres no explanation for their actions that shouldnt result in termination. If you did that to someone youd be in jail for a minimum of a decade. The department doesnt dispute the facts. The only defense would be that the people made everything up and nothing happened. They admit it happened.
If you forcibly take someones home, arresting them for not giving up their home, and use force while doing it you should be fired and really you should be in jail. Even worse they did it to more than one home. Thats completely unacceptable behavior by people given the power to take away peoples freedom.
Re: I used to think "police state" was an over exaggeration....
Posted by:
Joe Odious
()
Date: July 11, 2013 04:03PM
Mr GFR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Total over kill. I mean shit, what could ever
> happen on a mass transit system or in a train
> station. Ever heard of a place called Mumbia? But
> wait, that could never happen here right?
>
> The metro does what they call anti terrorism
> proactive patrols. These are when you see officers
> carrying rifles and wearing tactical vest.
The Metro police need M1 tanks and LAW's rockets too. You can never be too safe. I will wager my chances of being mugged on the Red Line are much greater than some towelhead machine gunning me to death. With all the equipment they can hardly move. Its overkill dude and you know it.
You can "what if" a scenario to death which is usually the way the civilian police end up more heavily armed than some countries military units. If they want to run around and play Special Forces let them join the military and stop posing.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Total over kill. I mean shit, what could ever
> happen on a mass transit system or in a train
> station. Ever heard of a place called Mumbia? But
> wait, that could never happen here right?
>
> The metro does what they call anti terrorism
> proactive patrols. These are when you see officers
> carrying rifles and wearing tactical vest.
The Metro police need M1 tanks and LAW's rockets too. You can never be too safe. I will wager my chances of being mugged on the Red Line are much greater than some towelhead machine gunning me to death. With all the equipment they can hardly move. Its overkill dude and you know it.
You can "what if" a scenario to death which is usually the way the civilian police end up more heavily armed than some countries military units. If they want to run around and play Special Forces let them join the military and stop posing.