Maggie’s Excessive force? Maybe? Maybe not?

[Graham]

Excessive force? Maybe? Maybe not?

First of all, if a person believes himself to be in danger he is not permitted by law to defend himself 'by whatever means necessary.'

Second, self-defense is not a "different" defense for police officers which permits them to employ a "+1" level of force.

 

[Slapchop]

Not that it matters cause the internet pussies who are only bold from behind the safety of their keyboards will still find issue with anything the police do but...

Its a rather lengthy video so skip to about the 4 minute mark.

 

[ArmyJerry]

I dont know who is worse the internet pussies behind the keyboard or the ones behind the badge thinking its a good shoot on the mentally disturbed because they have a knife thirty feet away.

Not that it matters cause the internet pussies who are only bold from behind the safety of their keyboards will still find issue with anything the police do but...

 

[Slapchop]

I dont know who is worse the internet pussies behind the keyboard or the ones behind the badge thinking its a good shoot on the mentally disturbed because they have a knife thirty feet away.

So you're saying that you actually came up for air and you happened to be at scene?

 

[Phezzik]

I think it comes down to the fact that even though he did have a knife or two, and yes this was after a three hour standoff where he threatened to kill the officers multiple times (I'm not LE, but I could only imagine the stress of standing around on alert arguing with a mentally challenged guy for three hours), they still shot him in the back after he agreed to walk down the mountain with them and turned to grab something. He must be some sort of CIA super spy to be able to attack someone from 30' away with knives while his back was turned. This event just adds to a long list of shootings by APD that are or were under investigation because they were seen as excessive force. Anyone familiar with APD can see that this isn't anything new.

 

[Bolt_Overide]

Not a cop hater by any means. But I absolutely question the idea that officer safety and getting home at night should be priority number one.

Public safety is number one, period, end of discussion. You knew the dangers when you signed up, just like I did when I joined the army. I didn't get to go around smoking every local with a gun because I felt threatened. same should apply to cops. If you don't like that, go work for the damn post office.

Now I'm not advocating getting stupid when it comes to defending yourself, nothing of the kind, but it needs to go back towards the middle some.

Oh and just to be clear. I do not have an opinion on this shooting, on the face of it it looks bad, but I do not have all the info those officers had. I am merely commenting on the officer safety trumps all horseshit, it doesnt, get over yourselves.

 

[Mike_Honcho]

Lethal force is met with lethal force. ".

Slap - just so you're clear - I 100% agree - ​categorically. However as the vid showed - while the subject may have threatened lethal force prior to the event - he was not engaged in the process of waging any force toward the officers.

First of all, if a person believes himself to be in danger he is not permitted by law to defend himself 'by whatever means necessary.'

Second, self-defense is not a "different" defense for police officers which permits them to employ a "+1" level of force.

Graham - you have such a nice theory….


No fear mere 'civilians', Officers Domique Perez and Keith Sandy will "suffer" the same fate as Officers Manuel Ramos and Corporal Jay Cicinelli - which is, absolutely nothing…..

 

[D.A.T]

Totally incorrect.

LE UoF is always applied one level higher than the level of resistance by the suspect. The fight is never supposed to be fair and the Police are supposed to win.

The Police applied multiple levels of intermediate force including beanbags and shotgun launched tasers which failed. At that point, it was headed downhill fast.

In the end, the subject met all 3 points of the Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy triangle that are required for use of deadly force. He had two knives, was within 21 feet, and refused multiple calls for surrender, instead choosing to draw knives.

Good shoot.

Right on...Where are the people that called the cops murders now? The facts are the facts and it was a good shoot in the eyes of anyone that has been there, done that and knows the facts.

 

[Slapchop]

Right on...Where are the people that called the cops murders now? The facts are the facts and it was a good shoot in the eyes of anyone that has been there, done that and knows the facts.

Gee let me guess, the grand jury came back with no true bill?

 

[dentout]

That's OK. There are already three fatal shootings in the last five weeks. They shot a 19 year old girl yesterday. What will they tell the grand jury this time. It is interesting that we will never know.

 

[Paladin4Christ]

I don't post much and I don't get involved with "terse situations".

That being said Murder is what comes to mind. If I was on the jury it would be guilty guilty guilty on all but the dog.

Sadly, I feel this will happen more and more as our police are turned from a focus on public assistance and pointed toward military/Active Shooter focus. These people are being constantly trained for the "Active Shooter Scenario" and I feel this leads to a pent up desire to use these tactics. While I agree the Active Shooter is a serious situation, does it really have to be THE focus? I live in a small rural town and actually got stuck behind a police tank. Seriously, a TANK?

Furthermore, I can say with a clear conscience I have never gotten a speeding ticket nor, am I a threat to any police officer. However, when walking into Walmart the other day, there was a couple police officers in the parking lot. When we walked by, both of them put their hands on their weapons and glared at my daughter and I, while they were both wearing full battle gear. (I'm not exaggerating. This is a town of 20,000 people most of which are attached to the local Naval Air Station.) I guess parking away from the yahoos who like to bang car doors warrants a threat to the safety of the officers.

On a side note, I asked my daughter (17) what she thought and she responded that they are thugs. I guess the incident when she was pulled over for having a light out one night coming home from cheering at the local high school football game made more of an impression than I knew about. But then again a 17 year old girl in a cheer uniform should be pulled out of the car at 10:00 at night and questioned for having a tail light out...right? This reminded me of my relationship with same Police Department, when I was a kid. Heck we did way more than most kids today and the officers always treated us with respect. I remember each year the sheriff showing up at our house to take away our fireworks or the local police officers talking with us as we hung out at the movie theater or local pool. Never once did I fear them. However, my children only think of them as "thugs", their words, not mine.

For the record I do not have anything against officers and I agree there is a potential of harm to them EVERY TIME they make a stop. This being said, there must be a balance and I'm afraid we are setting good men/women up for problems by focusing on the minuscule events that could possibly happen, rather than focusing on the things that actually DO happen.

Back on point, as a citizen watching this video, I saw egos shoot a man in the back and then sic a dog on him after shooting him several more times with bean bags. I don't care if he had a knife and yes I recognize the threats knives pose.

Flame away!

 

[W54/XM-388]

When a group of armed men come to take everything you have in the world and leave you empty handed, hungry, cold and destitute because some fatcats living off money stolen from other people's children's futures, prefer no "unfortunates" on their view of the hillside, you just might decide you have nothing else to loose.

I would however bet that unless he was truly insane, I could have gotten him to move to a new camping spot without violence for less total cost than was spent.

 

[VJJPunisher]

<a href="http://photobucket.com/images/snl" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1165.photobucket.com/albums/q583/sawatzky123/bdb3f2f6.gif" border="0" alt="snl photo: SNL Tongue bdb3f2f6.gif"/></a>

 

[marduk185]

the cops are like:
Tears For Fears - "Everybody Wants To Rule The World" - ORIGINAL VIDEO - YouTube

and the homeless dude was like:

a-ha - Take On Me (Official Video) - YouTube

and now citizens are like:

Phil Collins - In The Air Tonight (Official Video) - YouTube

so the NSA is all like:
The Police - Every Breath You Take - YouTube

 

[woojos]

Stepping away from the excessive force discussion for a second, and onto tactics.

Isn't the 21 ft rule based off the time it takes to draw and shoot from concealment with a handgun?

If one has backup, i.e. one or two guys with guns drawn and on target, carbines at that, what is the percentage of 1 shot stops i.e. DRT on a guy with no body armor?

I'm trying to figure out how far a guy with a knife could get on average, starting from a stationary position, with one or two rifles pointed at him.

 

[sharac]

Depending upon the skill of the marksman and weapon used but it can be anything up to 50m for handgun and 500m rifle for a SOP backshot that is. /sarc off

 

[hunterb]

Cops are NOT mental health professionals. They are not trained psychiatrists.

We are reaping what we sowed. Let the crazies roam the streets and stuff like this happens.

Increase mental health funding by 1000%, watch mass shootings become the rarity they once were.

 

[pmclaine]

Increase mental health funding by 1000%, watch mass shootings become the rarity they once were.

But crazy people have been adjudicated as incapable of exercising their right to vote. Why do we want to give money/care to people that even if you can put them into duress and force them to vote for you they are prohibited by law from doing so?

 

[ArmyJerry]

Its fkn murder, badge or no badge, they murdered that nut case, crazy or not he was on public land (he is the public), they murdered him because some snobby son of a bitch didn't like looking at him on that hill. I cant believe some of you people are making excuses for those fkn murderers, justifying evil actions by a guy because he wears the same color clothes as you, come on man, wake it the fk up.

 

[Graham]

Excessive force? Maybe? Maybe not?

Its fkn murder, badge or no badge, they murdered that nut case, crazy or not he was on public land (he is the public), they murdered him because some snobby son of a bitch didn't like looking at him on that hill. I cant believe some of you people are making excuses for those fkn murderers, justifying evil actions by a guy because he wears the same color clothes as you, come on man, wake it the fk up.

Murder is death of a human caused by malice and without justification.

Whether or not a police officer was acting under an affirmative duty at the time is relevant to whether the elements of murder are met.

Here there is no evidence of a snob on a hill ordering the death because he did not like to look at the man. But there is evidence of the man arming himself in response to verbal commands given by police.

Thus "badge or no badge" is often a clue to whether or not the correct charge is murder.

It has nothing to do with sleeping or waking the fk up.

 

[ArmyJerry]

Graham, your logic taken to the end dictates that the public should be prepared to go one level higher when dealing with the cops. Some of the actions of the police I been seeing the last few years has me wondering what their function is in our society. I used to automatically get concerned when I heard about a report of a LEO being shot, recently actually, now my first reaction is to wonder what the cop was doing when he got shot, did someone shoot him in self defense? or did a bad guy get the jump on him? I do not give the automatic benefit of doubt to the gang in blue anymore. I am Joe middle class white dude, pretty normal living, if you guys lost my demographic you must be absolutely hated by other less kindly demographics. I suggest you guys get kevlar plates if you continue down this murderous path because the public wont stand still for the slaughter. Sad state of affairs we find our country in these days.

Murder is death of a human caused by malice and without justification.

Whether or not a police officer was acting under an affirmative duty at the time is relevant to whether the elements of murder are met.

Here there is no evidence of a snob on a hill ordering the death because he did not like to look at the man. But there is evidence of the man arming himself in response to verbal commands given by police.

Thus "badge or no badge" is often a clue to whether or not the correct charge is murder.

It has nothing to do with sleeping or waking the fk up.

 

[Graham]

Excessive force? Maybe? Maybe not?

Graham, your logic taken to the end dictates that the public should be prepared to go one level higher when dealing with the cops.... if you guys lost my demographic you must be absolutely hated by other less kindly demographics. I suggest you guys get kevlar plates if you continue down this murderous path because the public wont stand still for the slaughter.

Jerry,
It's a human system; it has it's flaws. But even with the very public mistakes made by a select few I don't agree that most middle class people hate the police as much as you do.

That said, we wear body armor when we have to and because we have to: When and because there are well-armed people who publicly warn that we better wear Kevlar because they themselves will choose to define the law by their own terms.

 

[ArmyJerry]

Graham I never indicated I hated the police, stop making shit up, I just don't trust them automatically like I used to, lost trust does not equal hate, it equates to fear. That is the sad part about the situation. I do believe the middle class is much less trustful in the police now than even 5or 10 years ago, I am middle class my friends hold similar views, most of them are middle class, some well off and some working class.

I hope you do wear your gear and I hope your township pays for the best stuff for you.

Defining the law in their own terms seems to be the issue with the men in blue doing these bad shoots and their defenders, not me or Joe public.

 

[Graham]

Excessive force? Maybe? Maybe not?

I'm not making 'shit' up: I read your posts and came to that conclusion. You can attack me for saying what I said, or you can take it as a clue to knowing how what you posted is being perceived by others.

When police officers make a mistake like the one you suggested, they get punished and convicted for it.

BTW, you're off-base about my funding.

 

[ArmyJerry]

I hope so Graham. I don't think this guy made a mistake based on what I see in the video, I think there is something else at play here. I understand the cop that shoots someone by mistake thinking a wallet being suddenly pulled from a pocket on a dark street is a gun or the thousands of other scenarios that a cop can run into, this is not one of those "mistake" situations.

With what you seen in that video would you have shot that guy?

 

[Graham]

With what you seen in that video would you have shot that guy?

Interesting question.

With all the usual provisos: Like admitting that I don't know the whole story, and that it's easier to judge after the fact, and all the other usual correct things to say first:

NO. Without more, and based on only what I saw in the video, I would not have shot the guy.

 

[ArmyJerry]

I should have included the standard disclaimer info, sorry. Based on your posts I read in this forum I didn't think you would. Again all the disclaimers apply. Thanks for the forthright answer.

 

[Slapchop]

If the public hates the police so much, why is it that when the evidence is presented before a grand jury, it almost always comes back as no true bill? It isn't the officers co-workers sitting on the jury. Its the very same members of the general public that when presented with all the facts, evidence and circumstances decline to prosecute. Perhaps they know something you don't.

ETA: Before labeling someone a murderer, you should familiarize yourself with the definition of the word first.

 

[Paladin4Christ]

Too add to my post above...

Went to a Duck Unlimited event over the weekend.

A bunch of local Officers where there (City PD, Town Marshal, Sheriff and State Patrol). Guess what they were all doing, during the banquet. Standing in a circle finger gunning from SUL to pointing in while discussing the "Active Shooter Scenario" they worked on this month. Mind you they were all out of uniform and this was family event.

Tell me these guys aren't wound a bit too tight and is this really a good thing?

 

[Slapchop]

Seems to me like you're wound just as tight. Big deal, they were discussing a training exercise that they participated in. What would you rather have them talk about? Oh and I can guarantee you this, not a SINGLE police department in this country has a tank. Not a one. You may have saw an armored truck but you didn't see a tank. Stop sensationalizing things.

 

[Paladin4Christ]

Seems to me like you're wound just as tight. Big deal, they were discussing a training exercise that they participated in. What would you rather have them talk about? Oh and I can guarantee you this, not a SINGLE police department in this country has a tank. Not a one. You may have saw an armored truck but you didn't see a tank. Stop sensationalizing things.

I'm not wound tight. I'm concerned at what is going to be an increasing problem.

It is a fundraising event with kids present. It sets a bad image to see a group of adults standing around playing with finger guns talking about how they would engage some attacker. If it wasn't the police standing around, but instead a groups of kids or adults doing the same thing, I imagine those same officers would be concerned and the term radical or wannabee would be thrown around. Furthermore, what about the rest of the guests? I know I wasn't the only person put off by this display.

My whole point is; we are setting these guys up by single focus training them to the point that they can't be off duty without being wound so tight they need to finger gun. With this over focus, I image there are tons of guys dying to use this training and what would keep them from doing so at the slightest opportunity. Let me point out, we are seeing more and more police overuse their authority and immediately go to use of force when there were other avenues available. Furthermore, my daughter, at 17 and NOT a troublemaker at all, is terrified of the police in our area and doesn't hesitate to call them thugs. Remember she was scared shitless by the officer who pulled her over for a tail light and then demanded she exit the car, put her hands up and then intimidated her on the side of the road, while she was in her Cheer Uniform. Was she speeding, no. Did she break a law, no. So why the exit from the car, why the hands up, why the questioning? This single event molded her whole of opinion of police, for the worse. Is this the reputation you want the police to have? I know I don't.

No it wasn't a Sherman tank or an Abrams but it sure looked like a tank to me. Even if is it was "just and armored vehicle", why does a town of 20,000 people most of which are military need something like this?

 

[Slapchop]

Since when does a town's population serve as a determining factor as to which types of crimes occur there and what tools Law Enforcement needs to do their jobs. A town of 20k, do you question why the fire department has X number of ladder trucks or which kind of pumpers they use as well? I'm pretty sure they have an armored vehicle (which I personally believe every LE agency should have access to) in order to protect both citizens and officers alike. What qualifies you to make that determination? I mean, no insult intended but you don't even know what a tank is.

I really don't see the issue in them discussing tactics and being prepared for something. To me it sounds like they're being diligent and have a sense of situational awareness which most people lack. Also, if whenever I'm off duty and at some sort of event where there is a police presence, A. I don't make it a point to go over and try to listen in on what a group of cops are talking about, I tend to mind my own business that way. And B. I'm grateful for the uniformed presence cause it's something less I have to worry about and I can enjoy whatever it is that I came there to do. I suggest in the future you do the same.

You like many here feel qualified on opining on something you have very little knowledge about and you base your beliefs on what you see and hear in the media. Just bear in mind that the number one agenda of the media is to sensationalize stories in order to sell newspapers and advertising slots. Very rarely are they interested in getting the facts of the story. Lets face it, negativity sells. As far as your daughter is concerned, I feel sad for her that she has such a jaded outlook at such a young age. She obviously has no idea what a true thug is all about and I pray that she never has to find out. I'd like to know the totality of the circumstances involving her "broken tail light" traffic stop but I doubt that I'd ever get the truth without actually being there. Hell, perhaps you don't even know the whole truth of what took place.


But whatever, these discussions always end up exactly where they started. We live in a world where the bad guys are now the good guys and the good have become evil.

 

[KentuckyWindage]

We live in a world where the bad guys are now the good guys and the good have become evil.

You've heard it here first folks!

 

[Paladin4Christ]

Since when does a town's population serve as a determining factor as to which types of crimes occur there and what tools Law Enforcement needs to do their jobs. A town of 20k, do you question why the fire department has X number of ladder trucks or which kind of pumpers they use as well? I'm pretty sure they have an armored vehicle (which I personally believe every LE agency should have access to) in order to protect both citizens and officers alike. What qualifies you to make that determination? I mean, no insult intended but you don't even know what a tank is.

I really don't see the issue in them discussing tactics and being prepared for something. To me it sounds like they're being diligent and have a sense of situational awareness which most people lack. Also, if whenever I'm off duty and at some sort of event where there is a police presence, A. I don't make it a point to go over and try to listen in on what a group of cops are talking about, I tend to mind my own business that way. And B. I'm grateful for the uniformed presence cause it's something less I have to worry about and I can enjoy whatever it is that I came there to do. I suggest in the future you do the same.

You like many here feel qualified on opining on something you have very little knowledge about and you base your beliefs on what you see and hear in the media. Just bear in mind that the number one agenda of the media is to sensationalize stories in order to sell newspapers and advertising slots. Very rarely are they interested in getting the facts of the story. Lets face it, negativity sells. As far as your daughter is concerned, I feel sad for her that she has such a jaded outlook at such a young age. She obviously has no idea what a true thug is all about and I pray that she never has to find out. I'd like to know the totality of the circumstances involving her "broken tail light" traffic stop but I doubt that I'd ever get the truth without actually being there. Hell, perhaps you don't even know the whole truth of what took place.


But whatever, these discussions always end up exactly where they started. We live in a world where the bad guys are now the good guys and the good have become evil.

A - I know what a tank is. I simply questioned WHY a town like this (low crime) needs a vehicle like this.

B - I didn't go over and listen in on uniformed officers. They were in civilian clothes AND talking so loud that the whole room heard since it was a small venue. Contrary to the assumptions you have made about me and my opinions, I am very supportive of law enforcement.

C - You are an officer which explains your attitude and quickness to judge my knowledge, intelligence or ability to make decisions based on observations I have made. Many officers over inflate their importance, for example. Tell me, how many crimes have you prevented or stopped before they happened? I would put my money on ZERO. That is why my wife and I both carry and my whole family have been to Front Sight. We have accepted that we are solely responsible for our own safety and protection. Does this belittle how I feel about officers or lessen their role in society? Not one bit. All I have said is I'm concerned about the direction policing is heading and the negative impact this is having on the community perception of officers, as well as, the negative impact on officers towards the communities in which they serve.

D - Don't make assumptions about my knowledge. I have BA's in Criminal Justice & Political Science but, this probably doesn't qualify me to know whats going on, since I'm not an officer. In all of my posts on this topic I have not used media to justify MY observations or shape My opinions. Like I said above, these are observations I have made. The only media I have cited is the video of several officers shooting a man when they were in ZERO danger. Yes he had a knife, or two. They were already pointed in and it would be impossible for him to advance fast enough to attack them without them getting shots off. Furthermore, why the bean bags when he was shot multiple times with rifles and he was NOT moving. "Should we send the dog in?" Seriously. Fact 1: He is not moving. Fact 2: He was shot multiple times. Conclusion: Could he be incapacitated? Of course not, lets shoot him with bean bags and sic a dog on him. In my observation - they were too hyped up. Lets break it down - he was trespassing so the death penalty fits right?

E - In regards to my daughter. Isn't it interesting that you automatically take the officers side? Isn't funny how you have decided my daughter would lie? This is an honors student who has never been in trouble. Of course you have no way of knowing this so, I will let is slide. Answer this, as an officer, under what circumstances would you ask a 17 year old girl to exit a vehicle, put her hands up and then question her for 10 minutes, without giving some sort of violation? When she came home (visibly shaken up) and told us about it we contacted the Sheriffs office and all we could get was she had a tail light out. When I asked why she was treated this way, funny they didn't deny the treatment and they couldn't give me any answer except "for her safety." Really? As an officer, tell me why she was in danger inside the car?

F - The bad guys are still the bad guys to me. The good guys are what I am worried about. Community based policing is being replaced with training portraying the citizen base you are supposed to be protecting AS the bad guys.

E - If you are an officer (I have not doubt you are) then please understand this is not an attack on you and not an attack on any officers. I believe most officers have their hearts in the right place, including the guys I saw at the DU function.

 

[KentuckyWindage]

A - I know what a tank is. I simply questioned WHY a town like this (low crime) needs a vehicle like this.

B - I didn't go over and listen in on uniformed officers. They were in civilian clothes AND talking so loud that the whole room heard since it was a small venue. Contrary to the assumptions you have made about me and my opinions, I am very supportive of law enforcement.

C - You are an officer which explains your attitude and quickness to judge my knowledge, intelligence or ability to make decisions based on observations I have made. Many officers over inflate their importance, for example. Tell me, how many crimes have you prevented or stopped before they happened? I would put my money on ZERO. That is why my wife and I both carry and my whole family have been to Front Sight. We have accepted that we are solely responsible for our own safety and protection. Does this belittle how I feel about officers or lessen their role in society? Not one bit. All I have said is I'm concerned about the direction policing is heading and the negative impact this is having on the community perception of officers, as well as, the negative impact on officers towards the communities in which they serve.

D - Don't make assumptions about my knowledge. I have BA's in Criminal Justice & Political Science but, this probably doesn't qualify me to know whats going on, since I'm not an officer. In all of my posts on this topic I have not used media to justify MY observations or shape My opinions. Like I said above, these are observations I have made. The only media I have cited is the video of several officers shooting a man when they were in ZERO danger. Yes he had a knife, or two. They were already pointed in and it would be impossible for him to advance fast enough to attack them without them getting shots off. Furthermore, why the bean bags when he was shot multiple times with rifles and he was NOT moving. "Should we send the dog in?" Seriously. Fact 1: He is not moving. Fact 2: He was shot multiple times. Conclusion: Could he be incapacitated? Of course not, lets shoot him with bean bags and sic a dog on him. In my observation - they were too hyped up. Lets break it down - he was trespassing so the death penalty fits right?

E - In regards to my daughter. Isn't it interesting that you automatically take the officers side? Isn't funny how you have decided my daughter would lie? This is an honors student who has never been in trouble. Of course you have no way of knowing this so, I will let is slide. Answer this, as an officer, under what circumstances would you ask a 17 year old girl to exit a vehicle, put her hands up and then question her for 10 minutes, without giving some sort of violation? When she came home (visibly shaken up) and told us about it we contacted the Sheriffs office and all we could get was she had a tail light out. When I asked why she was treated this way, funny they didn't deny the treatment and they couldn't give me any answer except "for her safety." Really? As an officer, tell me why she was in danger inside the car?

F - The bad guys are still the bad guys to me. The good guys are what I am worried about. Community based policing is being replaced with training portraying the citizen base you are supposed to be protecting AS the bad guys.

E - If you are an officer (I have not doubt you are) then please understand this is not an attack on you and not an attack on any officers. I believe most officers have their hearts in the right place, including the guys I saw at the DU function.

Reminds me of this situation: Sipsey Street Irregulars: An Open Letter to the Men and Women of the Connecticut State Police: You are NOT the enemy (UNLESS YOU CHOOSE TO BE.)

 

[1time]

A - I know what a tank is. I simply questioned WHY a town like this (low crime) needs a vehicle like this.

B - I didn't go over and listen in on uniformed officers. They were in civilian clothes AND talking so loud that the whole room heard since it was a small venue. Contrary to the assumptions you have made about me and my opinions, I am very supportive of law enforcement.

C - You are an officer which explains your attitude and quickness to judge my knowledge, intelligence or ability to make decisions based on observations I have made. Many officers over inflate their importance, for example. Tell me, how many crimes have you prevented or stopped before they happened? I would put my money on ZERO. That is why my wife and I both carry and my whole family have been to Front Sight. We have accepted that we are solely responsible for our own safety and protection. Does this belittle how I feel about officers or lessen their role in society? Not one bit. All I have said is I'm concerned about the direction policing is heading and the negative impact this is having on the community perception of officers, as well as, the negative impact on officers towards the communities in which they serve.

D - Don't make assumptions about my knowledge. I have BA's in Criminal Justice & Political Science but, this probably doesn't qualify me to know whats going on, since I'm not an officer. In all of my posts on this topic I have not used media to justify MY observations or shape My opinions. Like I said above, these are observations I have made. The only media I have cited is the video of several officers shooting a man when they were in ZERO danger. Yes he had a knife, or two. They were already pointed in and it would be impossible for him to advance fast enough to attack them without them getting shots off. Furthermore, why the bean bags when he was shot multiple times with rifles and he was NOT moving. "Should we send the dog in?" Seriously. Fact 1: He is not moving. Fact 2: He was shot multiple times. Conclusion: Could he be incapacitated? Of course not, lets shoot him with bean bags and sic a dog on him. In my observation - they were too hyped up. Lets break it down - he was trespassing so the death penalty fits right?

E - In regards to my daughter. Isn't it interesting that you automatically take the officers side? Isn't funny how you have decided my daughter would lie? This is an honors student who has never been in trouble. Of course you have no way of knowing this so, I will let is slide. Answer this, as an officer, under what circumstances would you ask a 17 year old girl to exit a vehicle, put her hands up and then question her for 10 minutes, without giving some sort of violation? When she came home (visibly shaken up) and told us about it we contacted the Sheriffs office and all we could get was she had a tail light out. When I asked why she was treated this way, funny they didn't deny the treatment and they couldn't give me any answer except "for her safety." Really? As an officer, tell me why she was in danger inside the car?

F - The bad guys are still the bad guys to me. The good guys are what I am worried about. Community based policing is being replaced with training portraying the citizen base you are supposed to be protecting AS the bad guys.

E - If you are an officer (I have not doubt you are) then please understand this is not an attack on you and not an attack on any officers. I believe most officers have their hearts in the right place, including the guys I saw at the DU function.

A. Am I correct to assume that if you know what a tank is than you were being purposefully dishonest when you called it a tank?

B. You are supportive of LE but put off by the fact they were discussing their training. Worse yet, you are a gun owner and are put off by a finger gun?

C. You went to Front Sight? Now that you have that training you must be walking around waiting for the opportunity to shoot someone right????? I mean, that's you theory for police training, right?

D. I'll agree based solely on the video I would not have pulled the trigger. That said, when they approached him he still had the knife/knives. If he was incapacitated than shooting him with the beanbag will do no additional harm. If he was not, it would let them know. People act like their unconscious all the time. Not usually to set up an attack but it is not unreasonable.

 

[Pester]

One expressing a concern over a gap between expectation and reality does not equate into hating a group. A member of a LEO's constituency providing feedback should be viewed as such and taken as an opportunity to start a conversation with the intent to learn and improve(on both sides).

Most of my neighbors appreciate the approach of our local LEO's and that same group of neighbors all have examples of nearby counties that have adapted a much more rigid, worst case approach when dealing with the public. If the depts protocol is such that it breeds uncertainty, concern, angst amongst the populace they serve, then they might be well served to revisit those strategies.

I have two almost identical situations that provide a clear example. Horses in a disabled trailer that needed to be moved to another trailer on a small rural lightly traveled road with both being 40-60 yards off the road in a large turn out. In the first example 2 leo's show up and asked how they could help do this quickly and safely to ensure the horses did not get loose thus putting the horses and anyone else on the road at increased risk.
In the other example, a LEO in a different county told the driver she was not allowed to transfer the horse and if the horse was taken out of the trailer they would be arrested and the horse shot. Ultimately another LEO showed up and whether it was the urgent nature of the horses condition, the fear/tears in the womens eyes when hearing the horse would be killed or the other LEO's more measured approach my wife was allowed to move the horse. If the agencies protocol is so risk averse that the move could not be made then what does that protocol detail as a mitigation strategy? The first example was a person and solution centric approach. The second example was was rigid and lacked situational awareness or at least lacked the concern to gain a richer understanding of agency protocol.

I would think that LE would want an understanding, supportive community to work with. Just not sure how that gets accomplished if some LEO's are taking an adversarial approach.

 

[Slapchop]

A - I know what a tank is. I simply questioned WHY a town like this (low crime) needs a vehicle like this.

So if you know what a tank is, then why are you lying about seeing one owned by a law enforcement agency? To sensationalize or drive home your agenda perhaps?

B - I didn't go over and listen in on uniformed officers. They were in civilian clothes AND talking so loud that the whole room heard since it was a small venue. Contrary to the assumptions you have made about me and my opinions, I am very supportive of law enforcement.

Right sure you are, that is reflected in your written word.

C - You are an officer which explains your attitude and quickness to judge my knowledge, intelligence or ability to make decisions based on observations I have made. Many officers over inflate their importance, for example. Tell me, how many crimes have you prevented or stopped before they happened? I would put my money on ZERO. That is why my wife and I both carry and my whole family have been to Front Sight. We have accepted that we are solely responsible for our own safety and protection. Does this belittle how I feel about officers or lessen their role in society? Not one bit. All I have said is I'm concerned about the direction policing is heading and the negative impact this is having on the community perception of officers, as well as, the negative impact on officers towards the communities in which they serve.

I've actually stopped countless crimes. Both ones that were about to be committed or ones that were already in progress. Whether you chose to accept the fact or not, but the mere presence of a marked car or a uniform on a foot post is deterrent. Now granted, we can't be everywhere at once but never in the space that I've occupied at any given moment has someone been robbed, raped or murdered. Despite what you may think or chose to accept, society is a better place because people strap on a gunbelt, put on a vest and go to work everyday. And, as far as making assumptions, let me refute one for you. I don't inflate my importance at all. Not sure how you came to the conclusion or what it has to do with the topic at hand but its simply not the case. Keep up with your training because I do agree that you and you alone are responsible for your family's safety and well being, there is no argument there.

D - Don't make assumptions about my knowledge. I have BA's in Criminal Justice & Political Science but, this probably doesn't qualify me to know whats going on, since I'm not an officer. In all of my posts on this topic I have not used media to justify MY observations or shape My opinions. Like I said above, these are observations I have made. The only media I have cited is the video of several officers shooting a man when they were in ZERO danger. Yes he had a knife, or two. They were already pointed in and it would be impossible for him to advance fast enough to attack them without them getting shots off. Furthermore, why the bean bags when he was shot multiple times with rifles and he was NOT moving. "Should we send the dog in?" Seriously. Fact 1: He is not moving. Fact 2: He was shot multiple times. Conclusion: Could he be incapacitated? Of course not, lets shoot him with bean bags and sic a dog on him. In my observation - they were too hyped up. Lets break it down - he was trespassing so the death penalty fits right?

You're absolutely right, regardless of your education, you have no idea what it's like to be an officer. A lot of people don't like to here this, but until you do the job, you don't know the job. Plain and simple. He wasn't killed for trespassing. He was killed because he confronted officers with multiple weapons and refused commands to put them down. IIRC, this was a standoff that lasted for hours. How hard is it to put down the knives? Oh wait, I forgot, he was also a known, violent EDP with a history of aggression. Who are you to say what danger those guys were or weren't in? What experience or qualifications do you have that makes you feel entitled to make those assumptions? You weren't there, you have no idea how fast someone can move. You probably think that once a bad guy is shot that he does the ole Hollywood chicken dance and drops on the spot. I've seen guys shot through the heart that have run for blocks before collapsing. This is real life, dude not the movies. Mr Trespasser has no one to blame but himself for what happened on the side of that mountain. Well you can also put blame on his family for not looking after him and letting him get to that point, his doctors no doubt, whatever mental health professionals were in charge of his care. How much blame do they carry for what happened in your eyes? How much responsibility do they bear? I guess it's just easier to blame the guys who are called to clean up everyone else's mess. Were those cops "hyped up"? Fuck yea they were. If you ever put in a position where you HAVE to confront an armed lunatic who's expressed that he has no issue taking your life, I would imagine you'd be hyped up as well.

E - In regards to my daughter. Isn't it interesting that you automatically take the officers side? Isn't funny how you have decided my daughter would lie? This is an honors student who has never been in trouble. Of course you have no way of knowing this so, I will let is slide. Answer this, as an officer, under what circumstances would you ask a 17 year old girl to exit a vehicle, put her hands up and then question her for 10 minutes, without giving some sort of violation? When she came home (visibly shaken up) and told us about it we contacted the Sheriffs office and all we could get was she had a tail light out. When I asked why she was treated this way, funny they didn't deny the treatment and they couldn't give me any answer except "for her safety." Really? As an officer, tell me why she was in danger inside the car?

You obviously have an issue comprehending what you read. Even with your BA in criminal justice. I never took the officers side. I just said that I would like to know the whole story, not just your side or her side of it. Parents never think that they're kids lie but I know otherwise. Not saying that this is the case where your daughter is concerned but it certainly isn't outside the realm of possibility. As far as why they pulled her out of the car, there could be a myriad of reasons as to why. Does it really matter though? It's not going to change the way you think, nor am I trying to change your outlook so why bother?

F - The bad guys are still the bad guys to me. The good guys are what I am worried about. Community based policing is being replaced with training portraying the citizen base you are supposed to be protecting AS the bad guys.

I've never been to nor have I ever heard of ANY such training and I've been doing this for quite a while.

E - If you are an officer (I have not doubt you are) then please understand this is not an attack on you and not an attack on any officers. I believe most officers have their hearts in the right place, including the guys I saw at the DU function.

Hard to believe that its NOT an attack given what you've posted but everyone is entitled to an opinion regardless of how flawed and uneducated (not an insult) it may be. But its fine, most of us don't take this job for thanks and accolades. That's not what it's about. Just sucks that so many are so misinformed and they base their opinions off a 30 second news clip. Not to say that the system is perfect because it's far from it, but its not nearly as bad as some would make people out to believe.

..........

 

[Deputy D.A.]

Originally posted by Slapchop :

Isn't this what WE ALL do everyday. Don't WE ALL express our uniformed opinions to spouses, coworkers, and strangers on message boards on everything from Obamacare--which so many people have a strong opinion about, but I will wager the vast majority of which have not read a single page of the bill, and instead rely on their preferred source of spin...from Sean Hannity to Piers Morgan, and everyone/everywherein between--to whether Jameis Winston at FSU raped the girl (I know 98% of FSU fans opine he is innocent of any wrongdoing and 99% of all Auburn fans are sure that he is guilty), or even more benign how could X coach have been so stupid to call a particular play. I rarely find many people who are truly objective and don't let their emotions, predilections, biases, and self interest cloud their opinion. It is the rare person I encounter who can acknowledge that something significant and against their interest is actually right or correct. In our defense, aren't WE to some extent forced to make uniformed (or I should say partially informed or inadequately informed) judgements and choices due to the sheer volume of decisions we must make in life and the impossible task of being fully informed and an expert on so many issues.

 

[997/2man]

Interesting question.

With all the usual provisos: Like admitting that I don't know the whole story, and that it's easier to judge after the fact, and all the other usual correct things to say first:

NO. Without more, and based on only what I saw in the video, I would not have shot the guy.

Very good question, Jerry.



And Graham, your answering in the negative, tells me that you do see Jerry's point.



So. What does one do?

 

[Paladin4Christ]

A. Am I correct to assume that if you know what a tank is than you were being purposefully dishonest when you called it a tank?

B. You are supportive of LE but put off by the fact they were discussing their training. Worse yet, you are a gun owner and are put off by a finger gun?

I am not put off by a finger gun. It was a fundraiser and, in my opinion and the opinion of others, this was nothing but machismo and inappropriate. In fact it was pretty much a turn off in the event. That being said, if they want to do this it is their right. My point was, this type of training has become THE focus and it has such a small chance of happening. However, if the majority focus is on the "Active Shooter" wouldn't you agree it could be a negative? I only brought up this event because it demonstrated to what level these guys are pumped up. They can't even enjoy a family event and I think this is sad.

C. You went to Front Sight? Now that you have that training you must be walking around waiting for the opportunity to shoot someone right????? I mean, that's you theory for police training, right?

I go to Front Sight a couple times a year not every month and I do not go around looking for a fight. I also don't stand around talking about what I would do if some guy attacked me. I also don't put my hand on my weapon and glare at people, while a guy and his teenage daughter walk across the WalMart Parking lot either.

D. I'll agree based solely on the video I would not have pulled the trigger. That said, when they approached him he still had the knife/knives. If he was incapacitated than shooting him with the beanbag will do no additional harm. If he was not, it would let them know. People act like their unconscious all the time. Not usually to set up an attack but it is not unreasonable.

I am NOT attacking officers. I am simply concerned that the intense focus on "Active Shooters" is going to cause problems down the road.

 

[Paladin4Christ]

..........

I guess this has deteriorated to personal attacks but I guess that is to be expected given the fact that a citizen is questioning police motivation, purpose and role. I only commented at first because I was appalled by the video of police murdering a guy and then continuing to attack him after he was totally incapacitated.

I am concerned about where policing is headed. I think it is sad that youth today look at officers and are scared by them and think they are "Thugs". I think it is a sad situation PD's are setting officers up for with the laser like focus on "Active Shooters".

I'm sorry I didn't use the right vernacular regarding the "tank/armored vehicle". Heck I still don't see the need.

I am glad that you have stopped crimes that were in progress. That must be rewarding.

In regards to my daughter, I think the whole situation is sad. I only brought it up to show how one event could skew the mind of an impressionable kid and as an example of the effects the changes in police attitude or perception to the very public they are charged with protecting. There is no reason for anyone to be a bully, especially those that claim to be here to "protect us". This only guy created such an impression because he needed to feel power or some sort of superiority. (Yes this is only an opinion.)

Lastly, I hope that you never get into a situation where you kill someone like these guys did in the video. Because regardless of getting a "clean bill" from the grand jury, you would still have your conscience. I would bet that the guys in the video look back on this situation, when they are in bed at night trying to go to sleep, and deep down they know it was not a good shoot and they murdered some poor guy for trespassing.

Stay safe and I wish you nothing but wellness, happiness and a rewarding life.

 

[Slapchop]

I guess this has deteriorated to personal attacks but I guess that is to be expected given the fact that a citizen is questioning police motivation, purpose and role. I only commented at first because I was appalled by the video of police murdering a guy and then continuing to attack him after he was totally incapacitated.

Who personally attacked you? A difference of opinion isn't a personal attack.

I am concerned about where policing is headed. I think it is sad that youth today look at officers and are scared by them and think they are "Thugs". I think it is a sad situation PD's are setting officers up for with the laser like focus on "Active Shooters".

Your daughter isn't representative of today's youth. From my experience most kids still see law enforcement as the good guys. I'm sorry your daughter has such a bleak outlook at such a young age.

I'm sorry I didn't use the right vernacular regarding the "tank/armored vehicle". Heck I still don't see the need.

I'm sure that was done intentionally on your park. Very much like the media coining of the phrase "assault rifle".

I am glad that you have stopped crimes that were in progress. That must be rewarding.

It is.

In regards to my daughter, I think the whole situation is sad. I only brought it up to show how one event could skew the mind of an impressionable kid and as an example of the effects the changes in police attitude or perception to the very public they are charged with protecting. There is no reason for anyone to be a bully, especially those that claim to be here to "protect us". This only guy created such an impression because he needed to feel power or some sort of superiority. (Yes this is only an opinion.)

An opinion based on assumptions. You weren't there and naturally you're biased as to who's side you're on. No fault of your own.

Lastly, I hope that you never get into a situation where you kill someone like these guys did in the video. Because regardless of getting a "clean bill" from the grand jury, you would still have your conscience. I would bet that the guys in the video look back on this situation, when they are in bed at night trying to go to sleep, and deep down they know it was not a good shoot and they murdered some poor guy for trespassing.

According to a grand jury, he wasn't murdered at all. Not sure where you keep getting this information from. He didn't lose his life because he was trespassing, he was killed because he was armed and refused commands to disarm himself. Keep playing the murder angle if you want, it won't change anything.

Stay safe and I wish you nothing but wellness, happiness and a rewarding life.

You do the same.

 

[KentuckyWindage]

An opinion based on assumptions. You weren't there and naturally you're biased as to who's side you're on. No fault of your own.

After I recovered from a fit of uncontrollable laughter, I remembered seeing this and thought I should pass it along: Sipsey Street Irregulars: An Open Letter to the Men and Women of the New York State Police. The Deadline Approaches. What do you intend to do?
Please for this country's sake, remember what you are, instead of what they pay you to be...

Edited to fix the grammar...

 

[Slapchop]

After I recovered from a fit of uncontrollable laughter, I remembered seeing this and thought I should pass it along: Sipsey Street Irregulars: An Open Letter to the Men and Women of the New York State Police. The Deadline Approaches. What do you intend to do?
Please for this country's sake, remember what you are, instead of what they pay you to be...

Edited to fix the grammar...

What was funny exactly? And what is the purpose of continually posting links to these letters, what relevance does it have to the topic at hand?

 

[KentuckyWindage]

What was funny exactly? And what is the purpose of continually posting links to these letters, what relevance does it have to the topic at hand?

Your opinion was based on assumption. You weren't there. I am hoping that you are not biased as to who's side you're on, that would be a fault of your own.

That is why I laugh.

I posted the letter since it has to do with "sides". I jokingly meant "what side are you on?" when I posted it, I now see the error of my ways. I am sorry if I have offended you, I will politely excuse myself from this thread, thanks for the conversation my friends, I'm out.

 

[Paladin4Christ]

I guess this has deteriorated to personal attacks but I guess that is to be expected given the fact that a citizen is questioning police motivation, purpose and role. I only commented at first because I was appalled by the video of police murdering a guy and then continuing to attack him after he was totally incapacitated.

Who personally attacked you? A difference of opinion isn't a personal attack.

Lets see you have called me a liar, unable to make an intelligent observation because I am not an officer and questioned my child's honesty. I would say those are all personal.

I am concerned about where policing is headed. I think it is sad that youth today look at officers and are scared by them and think they are "Thugs". I think it is a sad situation PD's are setting officers up for with the laser like focus on "Active Shooters".

Your daughter isn't representative of today's youth. From my experience most kids still see law enforcement as the good guys. I'm sorry your daughter has such a bleak outlook at such a young age.

My daughter doesn't have a bleak outlook on life. Did you miss the part where she is an Honors Student, Class leader and on the Cheer team? She was not treated with dignity nor respect by the very representative of the people I taught her were there for her protection. Funny how you didn't choose to answer why she was not safe inside her vehicle. Very interesting.

I'm sorry I didn't use the right vernacular regarding the "tank/armored vehicle". Heck I still don't see the need.

I'm sure that was done intentionally on your park. Very much like the media coining of the phrase "assault rifle".

I have said from the beginning that my concern lays with the focus on training. I have no hidden agenda. However, you have yet to address my main point regarding the laser like focus on the "active shooter training". Interesting that you are unable or unwilling to even consider this focus could be harmful?

I am glad that you have stopped crimes that were in progress. That must be rewarding.

It is.

In regards to my daughter, I think the whole situation is sad. I only brought it up to show how one event could skew the mind of an impressionable kid and as an example of the effects the changes in police attitude or perception to the very public they are charged with protecting. There is no reason for anyone to be a bully, especially those that claim to be here to "protect us". This only guy created such an impression because he needed to feel power or some sort of superiority. (Yes this is only an opinion.)

An opinion based on assumptions. You weren't there and naturally you're biased as to who's side you're on. No fault of your own.

Not assumptions. Remember I contacted the Sheriffs office. They confirmed he pulled her over for a tail light and that he did have her exit the car. When asked why she was ordered to exit, remember the answer was "for her safety". Again, why was she NOT safe in the car? Do you have the intestinal fortitude to even offer a possible reason or answer why she was NOT safe in the car? In what situation would you order a teenage girl, in a cheer uniform out of the vehicle for a tail light stop? Would you really waste your time on a tail light stop?

Of course I am biased, she is MY precious daughter who has NEVER been in trouble and I saw her that night the sheriff made his impression on her - yelling, degrading her and demanding to tell him the truth about where she was and where she was going. Like the Cheerleading Uniform didn't offer a hint. I guess threatening to have her license revoked because she was in an "unsafe vehicle" was appropriate right? Oh and did I mention there was NO violation issued; not even a "fix it ticket". So yeah using the facts presented, I came to the conclusion, this guy was a bully and on a power trip. Please give me a reason to believe otherwise or a reason why treatment like this is acceptable.

Lastly, I hope that you never get into a situation where you kill someone like these guys did in the video. Because regardless of getting a "clean bill" from the grand jury, you would still have your conscience. I would bet that the guys in the video look back on this situation, when they are in bed at night trying to go to sleep, and deep down they know it was not a good shoot and they murdered some poor guy for trespassing.

According to a grand jury, he wasn't murdered at all. Not sure where you keep getting this information from. He didn't lose his life because he was trespassing, he was killed because he was armed and refused commands to disarm himself. Keep playing the murder angle if you want, it won't change anything.

Again, you don't address the content of the sentence and focus a side issue, in this case murder. Grand Juries are given one sided information and can be led by a prosecutor. Just because there is a clean bill issued doesn't mean those guys are guilt free or have no conflict of conscience regarding the shoot.

Stay safe and I wish you nothing but wellness, happiness and a rewarding life.

You do the same.

I will again address the fact that you have yet to address the possibility that excessive "active shooter" training could be creating a situation where the police are being to trained to look at all citizens as the next Sandy Hook killer when these situations are NOT the norm. I am curious why you are unwilling to address this? Is it because it is more cool to dress up in body armor and pretend to kill someone who is out there looking to cause harm to the sheep?

My whole point in all my posts has been to question the excessive training, in regards to the effect it is having on those that are charged with protecting us. Is it causing an unwanted change in the attitude LEO's have regarding common citizens in every situation? Is it putting them in such a heightened state that they immediately jump to the worst possible conclusions or immediately jump to pulling their weapon at the slightest opportunity?

As an officer, are you willing to actually address these questions or will you continue to flame me and divert the topic. Turn that knowledge only you, and other LEO's, have to address the actual concern.

 

[1time]

Paladin, this is where you continue to show ignorance of police work and training.

Active shooter training is focused on things like are we waiting for tac, are we sending patrol in with 4 man teams, 2 man teams, a lone officer, who is assuming command on scene initially. The shooting part is focused on the fact that if faced with an active shooter you will have 100's more good guys to work around to get to a bad guy.

And I don't know of any agency that can be accused of over training. Most don't get adequate training.

Nothing in the training focuses on looking at anyone as the next killer. That is outside the scope of what LE in general does. The little, and I do mean little training that we get is solely focused on how we can get to the shooter fast while minimizing body count.

 

[Slapchop]

I refuse to address it because the notion that active shooter training causes police to look at citizens as armed perpetrators looking to do mass shootings is ludicrous at best. Where I work, we train quite often in these very scenarios. None of us come out of this training view a negative view toward your everyday citizen. Where does the bullshit come from? What do you base this nonsense on? How many active shooter training courses have you attended? How many classes have you given on the subject? You don't have a clue on what the training is about, yet you've already drawn conclusions.

For the record, I never called you a liar. Your own words were that you saw a law enforcement tank in your town or whatever. When I refuted your statement, assuring you that no le agency in the country owns a tank, and that you must not know what one looks like, you stated that you were well aware of what a tank is. So knowing what one looks like and barring any proof/evidence to support your claim that you saw one, I guess you did in fact lie.

I also never accused you of being unable to make intelligent observations. What I said was, that your opinion on matters that you know nothing about carry little to no weight. You have no idea what you're talking about or how the system actually works, but you're free to talk about it all day long. Just know that you're ignorant to the subject matter. Don't take that personal, its not meant to be. It is just matter of fact. I'm pretty sure I would come off like a complete buffoon trying to hold my own in a conversation about neurology with a bunch of brain surgeons.

 

[Paladin4Christ]

I refuse to address it because the notion that active shooter training causes police to look at citizens as armed perpetrators looking to do mass shootings is ludicrous at best. Where I work, we train quite often in these very scenarios. None of us come out of this training view a negative view toward your everyday citizen. Where does the bullshit come from? What do you base this nonsense on? How many active shooter training courses have you attended? How many classes have you given on the subject? You don't have a clue on what the training is about, yet you've already drawn conclusions.

For the record, I never called you a liar. Your own words were that you saw a law enforcement tank in your town or whatever. When I refuted your statement, assuring you that no le agency in the country owns a tank, and that you must not know what one looks like, you stated that you were well aware of what a tank is. So knowing what one looks like and barring any proof/evidence to support your claim that you saw one, I guess you did in fact lie.

I also never accused you of being unable to make intelligent observations. What I said was, that your opinion on matters that you know nothing about carry little to no weight. You have no idea what you're talking about or how the system actually works, but you're free to talk about it all day long. Just know that you're ignorant to the subject matter. Don't take that personal, its not meant to be. It is just matter of fact. I'm pretty sure I would come off like a complete buffoon trying to hold my own in a conversation about neurology with a bunch of brain surgeons.

Just as I suspected, you are unable or unwilling to actually discuss the topic at hand. You would rather question my knowledge and throw out bullshit like "you opinion carries little to no weight..." or " I would come off like a complete buffoon trying to hold my own in a conversation about neurology with a bunch of brain surgeons". This is a cop out. Pun intended. Seriously, don't let your own self importance cloud your mind into thinking you are smarter than everyone else. You don't even know what Community Oriented Policing is. Sad.

Again, you didn't answer one single question I posed. Which tells me you are unable to have rational discussions.

"I have a BADGE so your opinion doesn't matter", "I have a BADGE so don't you dare questions me." or "I have a BADGE, Shut the fuck up and just thank me for what I do" are great options to your signature line. I think you would fit right in with the officers in their battle gear glaring as the sheep walk by. I mean seriously, how hard is to say "Good Afternoon." But then again, it is much more cool to glare and act important.

Then again you can't have a discussion with people who think they are superior to everyone else.

On a side note, I have a feeling you would have pulled my daughter out of her car to get your jollies because, you come off like a bully.