Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Things we'd be talking about if the forum wasn't deadFollow

#1752 Sep 03 2015 at 10:07 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,374 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Quote:
'm just curious because I've found that most of the time, when you start looking up the details of these sorts of incidents, they aren't quite the clear cut cases of abuse of police authority that they're made out to be. Yeah, the cops do ***** up, royally sometimes.
The problem is that in other countries, Cops don't seem to have these kinds of issues. The training, approach, whatever seems to prevent it. So a confusing situation shouldn't immediately mean someone gets shot, but in the US that seems to be the norm. The fact that someone potentially did something stupid and made the situation more complicated shouldn't stop us from being very very concerned with the number of shootings by police and shouldn't stop us from trying to actually do something about it.

To be fair, other countries don't have as many people that while not legally retarded, are without question, mentally challenged.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#1753 Sep 03 2015 at 10:34 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,228 posts
You really underestimate other countries
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#1754 Sep 03 2015 at 10:39 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,374 posts
No, its a sheer numbers game, combined with a complete lack of any sane gun control.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#1755 Sep 03 2015 at 10:58 AM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
I'd argue against crazy, but this is a country that argues that if an eighteen year old sleeps with a fifteen year old it's a crime unless they're lesbians. Thanks Florida.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1756 Sep 03 2015 at 3:29 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
It's the first thing every single cop does when put into an even remotely dangerous situation where weapons may be employed..
No-knock warrants by definition kind of work by intruding the place by surprise. The cops don't generaly identify themselves until after the door is forced open. You can see how this might cause problems, right?


They identify themselves, loudly, the second the door is opened though. For precisely the reason that they want to make sure that anyone who behaves in a threatening/dangerous manner is a "bad guy" and not just some homeowner responding to his door being bashed in by what he would assume are home invaders (of the illegal kind). Yes. It *can* cause problems (any action they take can), but if they knock politely and there are armed criminals inside, they've just increased the odds that they'll get into some kind of shootout. If they bash in the door and move in quickly, shouting that they are the police, the hoped for response is that anyone who doesn't want to get into a fight with them will get down and put their arms out in a non threatening manner, leaving them to be able to easily identify potential threats (those who are running around, scrambling to grab a weapon, charging at them, etc). And that the element of surprise will reduce the odds of any effective counter action by said criminals.

____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1757 Sep 03 2015 at 3:50 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm just curious because I've found that most of the time, when you start looking up the details of these sorts of incidents, they aren't quite the clear cut cases of abuse of police authority that they're made out to be. Yeah, the cops do ***** up, royally sometimes. But they are usually quite good at making it as abundantly clear that they are the police as they possibly can, doubly so when barging into someone's home, pretty much precisely to avoid the sort of situation you described. Those "jack booted thugs" are people too. They have friends, wives, family, and children. They have every vested interest in returning to them safely. The last thing they want to do is get into a shootout with someone, so anything they can do to avoid that situation, they will. The only thing failing to loudly yell "police!" over and over when engaging in these operations can accomplish is add "home resident thinking he's being invaded by criminals" to the list of people who might start shooting at them.

So you'll have to forgive me if I take with a grain of salt claims that they never identified themselves. It's the first thing every single cop does when put into an even remotely dangerous situation where weapons may be employed. Doesn't rule out the possibility of a failure to communicate that to someone, but "cops didn't even bother to identify themselves" is well down the list of reasons that may have happened IMO.

No, actually no-knock raids are a thing which are employed often in drug busts, so the suspects can't start flushing product while the cops are held up at the door. And done in the middle of the night, when people are sleeping, the residents aren't always coherent enough to realize it's the police shining them and shooting the place up.

I'm sure your co-worker know plenty of DEA agents who would swear that law enforcement doesn't condone this kind of action. I know better.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#1758 Sep 03 2015 at 3:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Kim Davis, previously mentioned county clerk in Kentucky, will go to jail for contempt rather than issues SSM licenses. A regular Rosa Parks, that one.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1759 Sep 03 2015 at 3:57 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Kim Davis, previously mentioned county clerk in Kentucky, will go to jail for contempt rather than issues SSM licenses. A regular Rosa Parks, that one.

You mean the ****-ugly woman who has been married four times to three different men, having her children outside of marriage, arguing for the sanctity of marriage on religious grounds? Smiley: dubious
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#1760 Sep 03 2015 at 3:59 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
It's the first thing every single cop does when put into an even remotely dangerous situation where weapons may be employed..
No-knock warrants by definition kind of work by intruding the place by surprise. The cops don't generaly identify themselves until after the door is forced open. You can see how this might cause problems, right?


They identify themselves, loudly, the second the door is opened though. For precisely the reason that they want to make sure that anyone who behaves in a threatening/dangerous manner is a "bad guy" and not just some homeowner responding to his door being bashed in by what he would assume are home invaders (of the illegal kind). Yes. It *can* cause problems (any action they take can), but if they knock politely and there are armed criminals inside, they've just increased the odds that they'll get into some kind of shootout. If they bash in the door and move in quickly, shouting that they are the police, the hoped for response is that anyone who doesn't want to get into a fight with them will get down and put their arms out in a non threatening manner, leaving them to be able to easily identify potential threats (those who are running around, scrambling to grab a weapon, charging at them, etc). And that the element of surprise will reduce the odds of any effective counter action by said criminals.

You've obviously never been privy to a police raid, on either side.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#1761 Sep 03 2015 at 4:01 PM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
Debalic wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Kim Davis, previously mentioned county clerk in Kentucky, will go to jail for contempt rather than issues SSM licenses. A regular Rosa Parks, that one.
You mean the ****-ugly woman who has been married four times to three different men, having her children outside of marriage, arguing for the sanctity of marriage on religious grounds? Smiley: dubious
Refuse SSM licenses, become SSJail Bride. Pure pottery.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1762 Sep 03 2015 at 4:11 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
cynyck wrote:
Well, how about this one? Police lieutenant is NOT briefed about an undercover drug bust and approaches his department's unmarked car during the bust, opens the rear door, and shoots an undercover detective that he's worked with in the past, who was wearing certain clothing that the early morning briefing made clear was being worn by the undercover officers (the lieutenant missed the briefing though, in his defense. /s), and as the undercover officer tries to crawl to the other side of the car while asking the lieutenant to please stop shooting, the lieutenant then continues shooting until he runs out of ammunition.


Totally inexcusable action by the officer, obviously. And by the department as well (he should not have been allowed on the scene having missed the briefing). My issue is with characterizing all such actions by police as "jack booted thugs". The overwhelming majority of these sorts of operations go off without even a shot being fired, much less anyone being killed. You're looking at the extremely rare exception (which admittedly gets all the news attention) and attempting to paint the entire issue with that brush.


Quote:
Yes, you did say that. But it seems that now that we have everyone carrying a video camera in their pocket, the police can no longer falsely claim the innocent person they shot was pointing a gun at them. It seems they **** up royally a lot more than "sometimes."


You have numbers to back this up? Your perception of the rate at which these things happen has changed, almost certainly because of increased coverage in this past year. The actual numbers have not though. Don't get me wrong, I do agree that raising an issue in the public eye can lead to improvements, but we have to be aware that this is what we are doing and not just blindly react to the rhetoric.

Quote:
And take your "They have every vested interest in returning to them safely" and stick it in your innocent people have a vested interest in not being shot by a trigger happy sociopath with borderline-average intellect.


Of course they do. It's a good thing that most police don't fit that description though. The problem is that most of the people the police interact with aren't "innocent", and sometimes it's hard for them to tell which is which, even under the best of circumstances. Want to know what the most common feature in a police related shooting is? The other person doing something incredibly stupid when faced with armed police officers. Shootings of civilians who are merely standing still, with their hands in plain sight, making no threatening actions or words, are incredibly rare. The problem is that we have a growing culture that assumes that the cops are the enemy, and thus attempt to do everything they can to evade or attack them when they have an encounter with them.

A culture, btw, which grows when people habitually refer to the police as "jack booted thugs" and "a trigger happy sociopath with borderline-average intellect". I'm not saying that police are perfect. Not by a long shot. However, is what you're doing actually helping or hurting the problem?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1763 Sep 03 2015 at 4:20 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Debalic wrote:
No, actually no-knock raids are a thing which are employed often in drug busts, so the suspects can't start flushing product while the cops are held up at the door. And done in the middle of the night, when people are sleeping, the residents aren't always coherent enough to realize it's the police shining them and shooting the place up.


And? Do or do not the police loudly declare themselves to be police while running around detaining folks and securing evidence? That's the key question here.

Quote:
I'm sure your co-worker know plenty of DEA agents who would swear that law enforcement doesn't condone this kind of action. I know better.


Again, what "action" are we talking about. I'm not refuting no-knock raids. I'm refuting the idea that police fail to make every effort to identify themselves as police while engaging in these raids. Nothing you just said addresses that question.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1764 Sep 03 2015 at 4:36 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
gbaji wrote:
Debalic wrote:
No, actually no-knock raids are a thing which are employed often in drug busts, so the suspects can't start flushing product while the cops are held up at the door. And done in the middle of the night, when people are sleeping, the residents aren't always coherent enough to realize it's the police shining them and shooting the place up.


And? Do or do not the police loudly declare themselves to be police while running around detaining folks and securing evidence? That's the key question here.

Quote:
I'm sure your co-worker know plenty of DEA agents who would swear that law enforcement doesn't condone this kind of action. I know better.


Again, what "action" are we talking about. I'm not refuting no-knock raids. I'm refuting the idea that police fail to make every effort to identify themselves as police while engaging in these raids. Nothing you just said addresses that question.

Sometimes. Sometimes they don't bother until they actually encounter somebody, which may be too late. Sometimes throwing flashbangs and yelling "POLICE!" causes people to scatter, react in self-defense, or retaliate.

Look, I'm not a cop-hater. My uncle was a D.A.R.E. officer. His two sons are sherriff's deputies. They've been working some major drug operations in central Ohio lately. I appreciate police officers. I just disagree with some methods and policies. Particularly ones that get civilians and police killed.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#1765 Sep 03 2015 at 5:09 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Debalic wrote:
Sometimes. Sometimes they don't bother until they actually encounter somebody, which may be too late. Sometimes throwing flashbangs and yelling "POLICE!" causes people to scatter, react in self-defense, or retaliate.


I think it depends on the scene itself. They're obviously going to want to delay the moment when those inside the house realize that they are there as long as possible. Usually, this occurs at the point of entry, since they have to make noise to batter/break/whatever their way in. At that point, those in the house know that someone has just broken in. Surprise is gone, so you have to move fast and make a lot of noise, and there's no harm in shouting "Police! Warrant!" at that time (and a lot of potential help). If they're able to enter silently (say because the back door is unlocked), they may wait until they encounter someone. Which, admittedly, can result in problems depending on *how* that encounter occurs.

In the case mentioned earlier, a kind of worse case scenario occurred. Back door is open. They been told there's an intruder in the house. They sneak in trying to find the intruder. Then they run into a dog. Scene devolves from there. Doubly so since there was no intruder.

Here's the thing though. What if there was an intruder? What if said intruder was in the house, threatening the homeowner with a weapon? If you were the homeowner, would you want the police to declare their presence at the open back door? Or sneak around until they find you, and take the intruder by surprise where he has less chance of killing you or holding you hostage? Again, as I'm sure your aware, that sort of scenario does play out. And in that particular case, they made the right call entering silently. It turned out very badly in this case, but in most cases, it would be the right thing to do in that situation, and of course, they have no way to know which is which at the time. They are forced to play the odds and "do nothing at all" isn't a choice available to them.

Quote:
Look, I'm not a cop-hater. My uncle was a D.A.R.E. officer. His two sons are sherriff's deputies. They've been working some major drug operations in central Ohio lately. I appreciate police officers. I just disagree with some methods and policies. Particularly ones that get civilians and police killed.


I agree. I think that one of the biggest problems many officers have is that they get a sort of situational tunnel vision, where they fail to re-assess their initial assumptions as new information presents itself. This can lead to semi-humorous hilarity as with an encounter I had with a particular police officer on a dark and stormy night, but it can sometimes lead to tragedy. In the case mentioned above, the presence of the dog, previously silent, but presumably taking some action deemed to be aggressive towards the officers upon entry, should have clued them in that there might not be an intruder in the house at all. The dog should have been barking or growling (or dead) already, not just now reacting to the police when they entered. But in all probability, the initial belief that an intruder may be in the house prevailed in their minds anyway. Which lead them down a tragic path.

Same deal with the cop shooting the undercover cop. He sees what he believes is a drug dealer in a car (cause that's what the undercover guy is pretending to be, right?). He assumes he *must* therefore be a target of the raid and opens the door, but then the target behaves in an odd manner (as an undercover officer would do when one of the officers on the raid he's coordinating suddenly yanks open the door and starts shouting at him and pointing a gun). He certainly didn't react as a drug dealer would, but perhaps more aggressively, maybe attempting to correct the officers mistake, but not getting through to him because in the heat of the moment, he knows this is a drug dealer in the car. Maybe he's holding something in his hand (a walkie talkie that is being used to trigger the raid perhaps?), but again, in his mindset, he doesn't see an object in the hand that fails to match his expectations of what a drug dealer in a car would be holding. He sees a gun. Something. Who knows? Adrenaline is pumping, and there's something "wrong" with the guy in front of him. He's in fight or flight mode, and his training teaches him to choose fight. He starts shooting. The undercover starts yelling at him to stop, perhaps attempting to move away, maybe still holding that unusual object in his hand that the officer has now (in his mind) identified as a gun. Perhaps waving it in front of him, trying to explain who he is and not understanding why the officer is still firing at him.

Speculation, of course. The full details aren't clear. But you can see how these sorts of tragic results can occur as a result of seemingly simple choices and thought processes that turn out to be wrong, but by being wrong, actually set up confusion in the officers mind, that results in a spiral of bad actions. The human mind is interesting in that it fills the gaps of what we see with what we assume we should be seeing. A useful trait, most of the time, like when we see rustling grass and a bit of color and fill in the lion that's coming to get us. But sometimes, it's can cause us to see things that just aren't there (or fail to see or properly identify something that is). I think that this is definitely one area that officers could be better trained to identify and recognize. But at the end of the day, it's never going to be perfect. But you could at least train them to better recognize when they've entered into that "I'm not sure exactly what I'm seeing" state, and maybe reduce the number of such tragedies a bit.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1766 Sep 03 2015 at 7:55 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
This may be the case I was tihnking of, got some details mixed up. There was no dog killed.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/police-officer-shot-killed-no-knock-raid/

According to the KPD press release,

"On Friday May 9, 2014, just after 5:30am, members of the Killeen Police Department Tactical Response Unit and the Bell Organized Crime Unit were attempting to serve a narcotics search warrant. The TRU was beginning to breach the window when the 49 year old male inside, opened fire striking four officers."


According to the police department's official statement, a SWAT team was sneaking in through a window. At 5:30 in the morning. To serve a narcotics warrant. Based on a bogus tip.

The victim of this break-in was almost put on death row. I personally think it's absurd that this even happened. I don't care if it's Pablo freakin' Escobar. Well, maybe then, but you'd better be very goddam sure it actually is Pablo Escobar.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#1767 Sep 04 2015 at 7:40 AM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
Debalic wrote:
My uncle was a D.A.R.E. officer.
My condolences.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1768 Sep 04 2015 at 8:55 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Debalic wrote:
My uncle was a D.A.R.E. officer.
My condolences.

Yeah, those family visits were pretty awkward as a teenager. He was in the Navy, too, as an...electrical engineer? in the Mediterranean. That whole side of the family is good old fashioned Midwest conservative, though I try not to hold it against them. I get a lot of Mourning Bands in my Facebook timeline.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#1769 Sep 08 2015 at 7:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
After nearly twenty years of educating the world about 16 corner cube with 4-simultaneous 24-hour Days within a Single Rotation of the Earth, timecube.com seems to have shut down.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1770 Sep 08 2015 at 7:37 AM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
I bet it took four days.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1771 Sep 08 2015 at 7:45 AM Rating: Good
***
1,065 posts
Jophiel wrote:
After nearly twenty years of educating the world about 16 corner cube with 4-simultaneous 24-hour Days within a Single Rotation of the Earth, timecube.com seems to have shut down.


So the government finally got around to hushing him up. That's bureaucracy for you.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#1772 Sep 08 2015 at 8:57 AM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
So a government employee got himself shot during a parade around here, and I can't for the life of me remember who's parade it was. We have a bunch of these pride parades and they sometimes get tricky to keep track of. So there's a plus to making government smaller. Also, apparently at least one child's body parts were found in a lake in Chicago. I guess day care is based on weight of the kid there?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1773 Sep 08 2015 at 10:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,237 posts
That's just rude. I mean, sure, soak the body parts so you can charge more; but at least return all the body parts you received.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#1774 Sep 08 2015 at 4:28 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Samira wrote:
That's just rude. I mean, sure, soak the body parts so you can charge more; but at least return all the body parts you received.


I hear that Planned Parenthood will take those body parts off your hands for you. Too much?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1775 Sep 08 2015 at 4:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
No way. If Planned Parenthood wants 'em, they can buy them. I understand that I'll be driving in a Rolls Royce made of baby skulls after selling these things.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1776 Sep 08 2015 at 4:49 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Jophiel wrote:
No way. If Planned Parenthood wants 'em, they can buy them. I understand that I'll be driving in a Rolls Royce made of baby skulls after selling these things.


No, no, no! See. The don't make as much money that way. What they'll do is charge a fee to "dispose of" the body, and then charge someone else to buy the parts. That way they make money on both sides of the deal. Brilliant!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 77 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (77)