I'd like to ask for a ceasefire on the cop/anti-cop stuff.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cropcirclewalker , I can see where you're coming from but our gov't. isn't a monarchy or a dictatorship . The LEO's are working for We The People and are enforceing the laws We The People made . If We The People don't like how the LEO's are doing thier job , then We The People should correct it . We must get out and VOTE and KNOW what we are voting for or against .
 
Last edited:
pinblaster, I agree on the voting issue, but that ignores the fact that being a truly informed voter requires much more effort than just whining about things people don't really understand.
 
Mr. Blaster, I appreciate your civility

and I know you must mean well, but you just drug a red herring through this thread.

I think we should all watch the weather reports and paint our houses when they need it, but what has that got to do with anything?

All those out there that don't vote, say "Hey"
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
the sound of crickets. :D
 
Any trouble I've had with cops in my life was usually my fault. I respect police as much as I respect soldiers and firemen. That being said, of course some are bad, and some make mistakes.

If I was a LEO at this forum and other gun forums, I would start posting Bad citizen threads full of gun owners that did illegal and stupid stuff, saying see, if it weren't for citizens, I would be able to own any Full-Auto weapon, .50 BMG anti material rifle, suppressed plinker, SBR, or street sweeper I want. DAMN YOU CITIZENS!
 
cop/anti-cop? Is that the same stuff that used to drive Star Trek warp drive engines? "Captain ah don' know if ah kin keep her together if we get a runaway cop/anti-cop reaction, but ah'll give her all tha power tha dilithium crystals can take." :neener:
 
From reading most of the posts, I don't think that this will ever be solved.

Why, because of what we (the non LEO's) have read and seen. The way that too many LEO's get off when they shoot a kid in the back with a shotgun. The way they love the no knocks and make a grandmother have a heartattack. The way the feds get away with killing 80 people, mostly children.

On the LEO side, the standing up for the bad LEO's or the feds and making excuses for what happened (I know, you protect your own but if your own is a murderer, you drop them like a rock or you will be disrespected). The comments made especially by Steve of PA here at THR. The way the higher ups in the LEO departments standing beside people like chuckie boy and sKerry saying that "civilians" shouldn't own guns of a certain type.

Why is it that in the "good ol' days" when an LEO stopped you, you weren't nervous or scared? You said Hello, they said Hello, and things went from there. Now, when you stop a "civilian" they are nervous and scared. Is it because they are criminals? No, its because they are afraid that they will get their ass kicked or worse if they ever look at the LEO wrong.

But I don't feel this way with the sheriffs department. They don't have cops who rape here, they don't have cops like in Portland that fire on people because they "thought" they saw a gun. Kinda funny the way ELECTED officials treat the People like people.

If you don't trust those who are supposed to protect you, who can you trust? So the best way to deal with it is not to trust those who you're supposed to trust.

You look at us as "suspects", we look at you as the "bad cop". You don't trust us, we don't trust you. You think that everyone is out to kill you, we think that every cop wants to kick our ass or kill us.

We won't be able to "ceasefire" until there is trust on both sides. As the US is going now, there will never be a ceasefire, here or in RL. We will continue to distrust you, as you will continue to distrust us. The only difference is that you (the LEO's) can get away with murder, while we (the "civilians") can't get away with protecting ourselves from the blue line.

This is life :(.

Wayne

Oh, before you go off half-cocked, read and think what we are trying to say.
 
manwithoutahome wrote:

The way they love the no knocks...

But I don't feel this way with the sheriffs department. They don't have cops who rape here [Eugene], they don't have cops like in Portland that fire on people because they "thought" they saw a gun.

I agree with manwithoutahome in that many city police seem to have a special affection for busting down doors and charging in.

When it comes to sheriff departments being more sensitive to rights and freedoms, well maybe in Eugene. Here in Portland we have our Washington county sheriff promoting it's no-knock fun in a media campaign in print and on the internet. Here's one of their flyers:

no-knock.jpg


Oh, and God bless gun owners in Eugene!
 
Ah, the hits keep coming, now with the no-knock BS thrown in. Classic cop bashing.
 
I guess youse guys must think that's a way cool poster.

What's that number?

15779?

They say you can smell that meth stuff but the OBAs are ridiculuous.

You sure they aren't going in to spray for cockroaches?

Now, one of those guys I'd like to see in a starbucks. :D
 
Meth has a very strong and distinctive odor..and the OBAs and MOP suits are pretty much SOP for a lab bust or cleanup. The Phosphor (?) gas is deadly as hell.

Had a medic here not too long ago respond to a 911 call at a meth lab...they run code to the location, the canksters flip out when they hear sirens and see lights..not remebering that they had called 911 .....they all bail out the windows and take off running..one collapses in the yard, face down. the medic runs over, turns him over, and the gas trapped in his clothes and under him was inhaled by the medic, and he died. Scary stuff.
 
It all stems from the fact that some who frequent this particular part of this site have become elitists. The fact that you and I have the undeniable right to RKBA does not put us above the Police or any other LE agency regardless of how you feel about them. If you want them to change then get yourself an application, do the training and become one. Uh oh, too hard and dangerous.....

Armchair quarterbacks, an over used term but perfectly applicable here. I have never served in the military, never been LEO, never in my life had to confront a REAL threat, so, just like you, I have no place to have an opinion on how these people do their jobs as seen in your version of how that should be.

Unlike most of these people, my daily routine doesn't have the constant potential of being confronted with someone who may want to harm me. That said, am I prepared? Only as far as I can reasonably guess without testing it out in real life. Get yourself some training at Gunsite, Valhalla or any of the genuine facilities, become an urban ninja in your own mind and you still don't come close to the realities of how situations develop and change.

Remember this...none of the good guys that had to deal with any of the quoted situations were involved in the planning of the attacks therefore it was all about judgment, something that many here are quick to say only applies to "after the event".
 
Mr. Burbanite, you said;

Get yourself some training at Gunsite, Valhalla or any of the genuine facilities, become an urban ninja in your own mind and you still don't come close to the realities of how situations develop and change.

Remember this...none of the good guys that had to deal with any of the quoted situations were involved in the planning of the attacks therefore it was all about judgment, something that many here are quick to say only applies to "after the event".
Sorry, you are trying to minimize the influence of the "on the street" officer and marginalize the importance of his oath.

When the statie climbs into the helicopter with "U. S. ARMY" on the side to go out and hover over houses at 60' altitude, looking for marijuana plants, it's just as likely that he could say to the pilot, "Hey, lets just go up to 8000 feet and listen to the Red Sox game on the ADF."

An ordinary citizen (maybe even the product of a govt. education) could determine that they were violating the 4th amendment and posse commitatus by doing that but it appears that the average LEO doesn't.

We had a guy here in my county last year went out and shot down a Helo which was doing that to his trailer. What did they convict him of? Felon in possession of a firearm. 10 years. Oh, yes, and willful destruction of Missouri National Guard Property 3 years, 5 months.

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/mow/news/shriver.sen.pdf

If he had not been a felon, who knows?

These guys swear an oath to protect and defend the constitution. What is wrong with this picture?
 
I usually don't even read the threads containing the bashing or
posing. This one caught my eye. Many good points have been made.

A story to illustrate a point.
During my high school years when I was doing the many things I could get
busted for, I lived in a small town in Maine.
We knew the cops, the cops knew us. We didn't like each other, but there was a game which was played which consisted of; we broke the laws and tried not to get caught, and the cops enforced the laws and tried to catch us breaking the laws. Nobody shot at each other, no one took it too far.
Now, the two cops of this small town would administer whatever penalties they could. Now I do realize the difference between arresting and metting out justice and who can do it and so forth. Anyways, mostly the penalties would be if they caught us drinking underage, they would make us open up the trunk and take the case or so of beer we had and probably keep it
for their own use. That would be the end of it until the next weekend, or next month when we got caught drinking again.
Sometimes we would try to "outrun" the cops, this was great fun (to us).
A 442 Plymouth Duster or modified Z28 could usually do the trick.
Like I said, it was a small town, there weren't that many 442s
or Z28s so the cops weren't that serious about chasing us - we would
be back. Anyways, the whole cop and bad guy game played out on a
different and smaller stage and at a different time. In the 3-4 years I lived
there, not many days was I not breaking some law (generally drinking under age, drugs, occasional minor vandalism, that kind of stuff).
There were a lot of accidents in that town of less than 2k, mostly drunk driving types, so the cops probably should have been upping the ante a bit.

We are not living in Mayberry. Even though the actors may live here, Sheriff Griffith and Barny Fife do not enforce the law in Los Angeles, Ca.
For many of the cops, they do not see you. They see the threat that you may pose. They see the hundreds of other guys that preceded you,
many who lied, the friends or fellow officers who were shot at, killed
or in some way endangered. You could not pay me enough to do their job
in this city.

Does this excuse the "JBT" attitude, the crimes, the harming of innocents?
No, of course not. But it is a different world. It's probably pretty difficult
to operate in that world without becoming fairly jaded about humanity.

The good cops are the ones who can differentiate, the bad ones can
only identify you with all the criminals, or are criminals themselves.

cheers, ab
 
An ordinary citizen (maybe even the product of a govt. education) could determine that they were violating the 4th amendment and posse commitatus by doing that but it appears that the average LEO doesn't.
Well you might want to study up on the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA), which is Title 18 Section 1385 of the US Code, which states: "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

So that brings us to your claim that the cop in the Army chopper looking for weed is violating the 18USC1385. Notice what I put in bold, because Congress created an exception in drug cases: 10USC374 "(a) The Secretary of Defense may, in accordance with other
applicable law, make Department of Defense personnel available for
the maintenance of equipment for Federal, State, and local civilian
law enforcement officials, including equipment made available under
section 372 of this title.
(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2) and in accordance with other
applicable law, the Secretary of Defense may, upon request from the
head of a Federal law enforcement agency, make Department of
Defense personnel available to operate equipment (including
equipment made available under section 372 of this title) with
respect to -
(A) a criminal violation of a provision of law specified in
paragraph (4)(A);
(B) assistance that such agency is authorized to furnish to a
State, local, or foreign government which is involved in the
enforcement of similar laws;
(C) a foreign or domestic counter-terrorism operation; or
(D) a rendition of a suspected terrorist from a foreign country
to the United States to stand trial.
(2) Department of Defense personnel made available to a civilian
law enforcement agency under this subsection may operate equipment
for the following purposes:
(A) Detection, monitoring, and communication of the movement of
air and sea traffic.
(B) Detection, monitoring, and communication of the movement of
surface traffic outside of the geographic boundary of the United
States and within the United States not to exceed 25 miles of the
boundary if the initial detection occurred outside of the
boundary.
(C) Aerial reconnaissance.
(D) Interception of vessels or aircraft detected outside the
land area of the United States for the purposes of communicating
with such vessels and aircraft to direct such vessels and
aircraft to go to a location designated by appropriate civilian
officials.
(E) Operation of equipment to facilitate communications in
connection with law enforcement programs specified in paragraph
(4)(A).
(F) Subject to joint approval by the Secretary of Defense and
the Attorney General (and the Secretary of State in the case of a
law enforcement operation outside of the land area of the United
States) -
(i) the transportation of civilian law enforcement personnel
along with any other civilian or military personnel who are
supporting, or conducting, a joint operation with civilian law
enforcement personnel;
(ii) the operation of a base of operations for civilian law
enforcement and supporting personnel; and
(iii) the transportation of suspected terrorists from foreign
countries to the United States for trial (so long as the
requesting Federal law enforcement agency provides all security
for such transportation and maintains custody over the suspect
through the duration of the transportation).
(3) Department of Defense personnel made available to operate
equipment for the purpose stated in paragraph (2)(D) may continue
to operate such equipment into the land area of the United States
in cases involving the pursuit of vessels or aircraft where the
detection began outside such land area.
(4) In this subsection:
(A) The term ''Federal law enforcement agency'' means a Federal
agency with jurisdiction to enforce any of the following:
(i) The Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) or
the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 951
et seq.).

(ii) Any of sections 274 through 278 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324-1328).
(iii) A law relating to the arrival or departure of
merchandise (as defined in section 401 of the Tariff Act of
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1401) into or out of the customs territory of
the United States (as defined in general note 2 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States) or any other
territory or possession of the United States.
(iv) The Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (46 U.S.C. App.
1901 et seq.).
(v) Any law, foreign or domestic, prohibiting terrorist
activities.
(B) The term ''land area of the United States'' includes the
land area of any territory, commonwealth, or possession of the
United States.
(c) The Secretary of Defense may, in accordance with other
applicable law, make Department of Defense personnel available to
any Federal, State, or local civilian law enforcement agency to
operate equipment for purposes other than described in subsection
(b)(2) only to the extent that such support does not involve direct
participation by such personnel in a civilian law enforcement
operation unless such direct participation is otherwise authorized
by law."

So there are a lot of things the military folks can do, including support civilian LE enforcing Title 21 (drug laws). What they can't do is participate directly in searching, seizing and arresting in accordance with 10USC375. However, flying over property and looking at things in plain view is not a search, hence no 4A violation, and no PCA violation.

So I guess some, "ordinary citizens" with a "govt. education" could figure it all out, if they actually read the relevant legal documents, to include the Constitution, relevant portions of the US Code, and relevant court decisions.

Feel free to check it out at www.findlaw.com
 
Oh cropcircle, I went back and read the press release, and another little tidbit about PCA applies here. It was a National Guard chopper, meaning STATE not FEDERAL, and therefore PCA didn't apply. They didn't even need an exception from Congress because the NG guys weren't under control of the US military at the time, they were under the control of the Governor of Missouri.
 
Not that I agree with shooting down a Military Helo.....
But,
So there are a lot of things the military folks can do, including support civilian LE enforcing Title 21 (drug laws). What they can't do is participate directly in searching, seizing and arresting in accordance with 10USC375. However, flying over property and looking at things in plain view is not a search, hence no 4A violation, and no PCA violation.


It might be different people's definition of PLAIN view,......or did they really mean to write airPLANE view? :rolleyes:
 
Why is it that in the "good ol' days" when an LEO stopped you, you weren't nervous or scared?
Hmmmm, how many people get stopped and aren't a little bit nervous. I know when I used to get pulled over in my youth, I was pretty nervous because a ticket would put me in hot water with the old man. Now the opposite is the case for me. I am not that nervous and I am not scared when I get pulled over and I am armed! The last two times I was pulled over the officer was at my window for no more than 30 seconds. Boy those guys sure did a number on my civil rights and screwed up my life. :rolleyes:

I just find it entertaining how it takes so many generalizations and the down right fear from the anti-leo crowd to justify their case. And it continues to build upon itself. You get people so afraid of cops they do dumb things and it helps get them hurt. If you just relaxed and used some common sense, things would probably turn out alright.

And this whole how can you be a libertarian and be a cop nonsense. Has anyone really paid attention to how much cops do use their discretion in cases? Sure we hear stories about cops getting anal, but we never seem to hear about how a cop let a guy off. How a cop doesn't care if you have an assault weapon, but warns you that is illegal and to be careful who sees it. Of course we would never hear about any of these things because even if we did, we don't trust cops and they would be lying anyway.

This is a vicious cycle that will never end. I am ashamed to see so many THR members have this attitude. This sad state of affairs reminds me of the Nick Burg blow-up a few months ago.
 
For anyone who yearns for the 'good old days', you might want to revist some of the US Supreme Court decisions rendered in the 50s, 60s and 70s, and read what was going on do the defendants in those cases. Then pause and think for a moment, and realize that this was fairly common practice.

Talk to an old cop from that era...break bad on the Popo and you would probably go to the hospital, if not the morgue, and few would ever question what happened. Media coverage of police brutality? Ha! Police brutality? Whats that? It was only brutal if he died. And if you happened to be brown? Or any shade other than lilly-white? Game on. Invoke your rights? What rights?

Or go back further, prior to the 14th Amendment, and note that state and local agencies were completely free of the checks on their power built into the Bill of Rights...so much so that federal agencies would often use local cops to get around the BOR and deliver evidence to them "on a silver platter".

Still want the good old days?

I sure don't.

Mike
 
This is such a hoot. People can stretch the meaning of words and torture the spriit of law.

The federal govt. owns and controls their helos. On the side is printed "U.S. ARMY". Seems like in 1916 the feds took over the NG.

The guy who's home (air space, which is part of his premises) is being invaded is supposed to know when he looks up into the face of the pilot of the "U.S. ARMY" marked aircraft that it is the governor of the state instead of Colin Powell that is looking back at him.

60' is close enough to make eye contact.

Now, I expect to hear that the govt will be coming out with little individual hover craft so that they can fly over anybody's property and look at anything they want. You know the only difference between a hover craft and a helicopter is altitude.

Talk about tortured.

I am gonna have to get me one of those too. I can hover my way out into the infield of the world series and as long as I continue to hover I will not be trespassing and still have a real good view without even buying a ticket.
 
A statement during the Cold War attributed to Ronald Reagan is "Trust but verify".

I think that is the nature of the relationship that civilians and LEO's are faced with in the world we live in.

We must trust that officers will do their job well, but oversight needs to be strict because criminals do infiltrate their ranks, or sadly, some succumb to criminal behavior.

LEO's need to trust and verify claims made by civilians they encounter, and need to conduct their activities within the law, and the authority granted to them. The badge and the gun does not a despot create.

LEO's will have their point of view challenged, and some don't react well to that.

Citizens will challenge the LEO's perspective, and some don't do a good job of presenting their respectful but vigorous dissent.

I think these threads are useful because they depict what way too many, including THR members are willing to do, dismiss the facts when their content contradicts their "world view". Unverifiable anecdotes, degenerate into generalizations and rationalizations, then impassioned distortion and name calling.

These activities are useful because within the THR community it collectively provides a mirror to observe who we really are.

The original poster didn't like what he saw, and recommended change. Objective evidence within this thread based on post content indicates many are unwilling to change. It's sad, but it's reality...the sooner we face it, the more rapidly we can work individually for positive change. That positive change cannot be imposed...oh sure, the mod's could begin censoring these threads and tossing members, but it won't change the underlying reality.

That reality is where we need to focus our energies. Officers who are committed to doing their job right and willing to objectively receive criticism.

Civilians who are willing to "walk a mile in their shoes", and work hard to make encounters with LEO's safe and positive (as can be).

All of us working hard on a day-by-day basis instead of throwing in the towel and having an "it's all about me attitude"...no, the mod's can't do that for us...that's something we have to do for ourselves.

Stay safe,

CZ52'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top