Portland Occupier gets a face full of pepper spray [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Portland Occupier gets a face full of pepper spray


jacquejet
11-19-2011, 20:10
http://thisainthell.us/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/owsportlandspray.11172011_.jpg

Young female (i think) gets a face full of pepper spray after pushing her luck just a little to far with the Portland Police at the Occupy Portland site.

So tell me, how does it taste?

msu_grad_121
11-19-2011, 20:23
"Tastes like...burning!"

Never a clearer case of "play stupid games..."

CJStudent
11-19-2011, 20:38
Would you like fries with that?

XxMerlinxX
11-19-2011, 20:56
http://ct.fra.bz/ol/fz/sw/i48/5/11/19/fbz_946dcf58985c762e120a11216e0db475.jpg

Trigger Finger
11-19-2011, 21:08
It works best if the children protesting has acne!!!!:whistling:

x_out86
11-19-2011, 22:59
http://thisainthell.us/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/owsportlandspray.11172011_.jpg

So tell me, how does it taste?

I dont know how it tasted on her end, but for the officer I am sure it tasted like "sweet sweet justice".

janice6
11-19-2011, 23:02
The cops choices are few. The chancellor said to remove them and it's spray, baton, bullet. (can't run them over with the car).


Cops used the least force. All they did was push a button.

The-Fly
11-19-2011, 23:10
Smells like.........victory!
:tongueout:

The-Fly
11-19-2011, 23:22
I found this.......


http://www.harrystone.net/posted/occupywhar.jpg

Trigger Finger
11-20-2011, 00:03
The cops choices are few. The chancellor said to remove them and it's spray, baton, bullet. (can't run them over with the car).


Cops used the least force. All they did was push a button.


There was a protest by Iranians about 15 years ago. It was in an area covered by LASD, West Hollywood I think. One LASD Deputy got into trouble and requested help. Two deputies in a Blk and White responded to assist and the Iranians refused to get out of the way. The deputy put out another help call and the deputies in the Blk and Wht drove through the protesters, running over a couple. It was on the news and it was GREAT, controversial to the media, but justified.

About a week later LASD were selling T-Shirts with a nice picture of the incident and the caption said "LASD, We Ran Over Irianians".
True!!:supergrin:

janice6
11-20-2011, 00:06
Thanks, I never heard about that one. Ya gotta have a sense of humor.

opelwasp
11-20-2011, 03:29
I found this.......


http://www.harrystone.net/posted/occupywhar.jpg

Did you hear that?

A SWAT angel just got his wings!:angel:

msu_grad_121
11-20-2011, 03:45
Did you hear that?

A SWAT angel just got his wings!:angel:

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

FTW!!!

collim1
11-20-2011, 05:27
I pray these losers never make it to my as I area. I work in a college town, but have never had ANY type of riot/crowd control training.

jpa
11-20-2011, 08:38
I pray these losers never make it to my as I area. I work in a college town, but have never had ANY type of riot/crowd control training.

Now might be as good a time as any to try to find some before it does happen. Find your nearest large city and contact their training division.

Mayhem like Me
11-20-2011, 10:08
Now that's a Binaca Blast.....

Mayhem like Me
11-20-2011, 10:09
Wait we're Assuming the blast came from the police, she could be some kind of pez head alien....

Trigger Finger
11-20-2011, 11:33
Now might be as good a time as any to try to find some before it does happen. Find your nearest large city and contact their training division.

In California it's the county sheriff that can provide that type of training. Also a mutual agreement for emergencies between neighboring agencies should be considered if it's not already in place and demonstrations like this is considered an emergency if that agency is unable to handle it alone.
Now's the time!!

The-Fly
11-20-2011, 13:48
and some more laughs..........



http://k.wigflip.com/WsFgCKpm/roflbot.jpg

MeefZah
11-20-2011, 19:46
http://ct.fra.bz/ol/fz/sw/i48/5/11/19/fbz_946dcf58985c762e120a11216e0db475.jpg

:rofl:

XxMerlinxX
11-21-2011, 00:00
:rofl:

I made that one myself, I'm pretty proud of it. :supergrin:

ChuteTheMall
11-21-2011, 07:29
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/pepper.jpg

MeefZah
11-21-2011, 09:45
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/pepper.jpg

Apparently that officer (if that is the image from UC Davis), another officer, and the chief are now on admin leave over those ****birds getting maced. Unbelievable.

jpa
11-21-2011, 10:06
Apparently that officer (if that is the image from UC Davis), another officer, and the chief are now on admin leave over those ****birds getting maced. Unbelievable.

Yeah, that would be them. Another case of damned if you do, damned if you don't. I believe they were given the order from the administration to clear the campus, they followed it and got hung out to dry for it. I wonder how the administration or media would have felt if they got some stick time in on them instead. That's the only other alternative I can think of, sure can't shoot them.

cowboywannabe
11-21-2011, 10:10
wheres the video?!

Mayhem like Me
11-21-2011, 10:15
You forget the maginal unicorn dust the President from UC Davis thinks we have....

High level education administrators are some of the most blissfully ignorant people I know of.

Lets see, we have a vocal minority shutting down sections of the campus impeding the flow of pedestrian traffic to buildings, it is a criminal offense arrest them and ban them from campus, if students, they get placed on probation at the college as well and may be expelled.

fran m
11-21-2011, 19:40
These protesters were ready for the spray and got what they wished. Too bad for the police because they did nothing wrong and are subjected to this unwarranted scrutiny. There is no harmful effect by it and they were pretty covered up.

The media is blowing this use of force way out of proportion. In the use of force continuum it is after mere officer presence and verbal commands. They were warned, I would think repeatedly and didn't move. The next step can be pepper spray/ taser. Could you imagine the outcry if they were tazed.

Its pepper spray, not 9mm.

hamster
11-21-2011, 19:54
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/pepper.jpg

Ah yes, I'm so proud to be in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble*, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

*Unless some guy unilaterally decides that the assembly has gone to long, or someone else tinkles in the bushes.

http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2011/11/21/declaration_custom.jpg?t=1321906472&s=3
http://cdn.hyperallergic.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/pepper-03-600.jpg

m2hmghb
11-21-2011, 21:20
Ah yes, I'm so proud to be in the land of the free and the home of the brave.



http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2011/11/21/declaration_custom.jpg?t=1321906472&s=3
http://cdn.hyperallergic.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/pepper-03-600.jpg


http://www.democraticunderground.com/

There's a place you can take your attitude to.

msu_grad_121
11-21-2011, 21:34
Funny, the protesters were in a place (on private property, blocking ingress and egress pathways) they had no legal right to be, after having been told repeatedly that they must leave or face the consquences, which include use of force and arrest. They made the concious choice to ingnore those orders and warnings, and the officers made good on their warnings. I don't see the problem. Pepper spray them, take them to jail, go home and sleep well in the knowledge that you have done your job.

What these types of idiots (and the OWS schmucks) don't seem to realize is that there are consequences for your actions. Did they think the police were kidding? Did they think that despite the fact that UC Davis property is private, they had some right to disregard the lawful orders of those police officers carrying out the request of the custodian of said property? If so, then I would recommend these "protesters" attend some severe remedial instruction, as well as an additional attitude check for a certain poster on this thread who shall remain nameless, yet thinks that an offer acting fully within the law is somehow violating the First Amendment.

You buy your ticket and you take your ride. Period. Their ticket was that they chose to ignore the orders of the police officers on scene, bolstered no doubt by their "comrades in the great struggle." Their ride was a nice blast of OC, which has never been shown to have any effect beyond an immediate discomfort, and which every police officer in the last 2 to 3 decades has had to endure, and survived.

On a personal note, I feel the administration and officers were, if anything, too lenient with the protesters by even letting them get to that point. Having said that, I now have no respect for the administraion of UC Davis for hanging officers out to dry for doing the very thing that they were ordered to do, and which was not immoral, unethical or illegal. Shame on that administration.

dooga
11-21-2011, 21:49
Its pepper spray, not 9mm.
I guarantee you that these kids are totally willing to bait a Kent State episode in order to make their case.

So be expecting it, I hate to say, and also don't expect that "within the law" or "I was just following orders" to play out well on the stage of public opinion.

These kids are super media-savvy and much better organized (and educated) than most all of their uniformed adversaries.

They might very well be stinky hippie freaks but they're smart SHFs.

All of this is reverse entrapment for the cameras.

MeefZah
11-22-2011, 03:43
I guarantee you that these kids are totally willing to bait a Kent State episode in order to make their case.

What exactly is their case?

hamster
11-22-2011, 08:09
Did they think that despite the fact that UC Davis property is private, they had some right to disregard the lawful orders of those police officers carrying out the request of the custodian of said property?

UC Davis is a tax payer supported state institution. It is as "private" as any tax payer funded institution.

Those students are residents of the campus sitting in an outdoor venue. Lets not conflate private property rights and universities with the name of the state right in them.

I'm no fan of these protests, and honestly I have no idea of what they are even going on about... yet somehow in NYC the police managed to barricade vital "ingesses and egresses" so why is it these clowns allowed an unorganized group of hippies to completely surround a walkway so vital to public safety?

I'd handle this exactly how I handle my 19 month old when he is having a temper tantrum. I'd walk away and ignore them, eventually they'll get up.

m2hmghb
11-22-2011, 08:50
UC Davis is a tax payer supported state institution. It is as "private" as any tax payer funded institution.

Those students are residents of the campus sitting in an outdoor venue. Lets not conflate private property rights and universities with the name of the state right in them.

I'm no fan of these protests, and honestly I have no idea of what they are even going on about... yet somehow in NYC the police managed to barricade vital "ingesses and egresses" so why is it these clowns allowed an unorganized group of hippies to completely surround a walkway so vital to public safety?

I'd handle this exactly how I handle my 19 month old when he is having a temper tantrum. I'd walk away and ignore them, eventually they'll get up.


It's rather easy the heads of the university wouldn't let the police do their jobs. Their type never do. They want results but they don't sanction what it takes to get results. They think a spoken word is enough to get people to do things, but you cannot use and foul language. In other words they're out of touch with reality.

wprebeck
11-22-2011, 08:53
UC Davis is a tax payer supported state institution. It is as "private" as any tax payer funded institution.

Those students are residents of the campus sitting in an outdoor venue. Lets not conflate private property rights and universities with the name of the state right in them.

I'm no fan of these protests, and honestly I have no idea of what they are even going on about... yet somehow in NYC the police managed to barricade vital "ingesses and egresses" so why is it these clowns allowed an unorganized group of hippies to completely surround a walkway so vital to public safety?

I'd handle this exactly how I handle my 19 month old when he is having a temper tantrum. I'd walk away and ignore them, eventually they'll get up.

Weird.

I dealt with my children (all four) differently. Instead of playing Dr. Spock with them, I dealt with them more decisively - I "gave" them a reason to cry. Oddly enough, a simple glance or at the most, a comment from me, now forestalls any rude, disrespectful, or boorish behavior. Even more odd - I noticed that, if left alone to their own devices, their behavior would continue to worsen UNTIL they got what they wanted ...or, what they thought they wanted, which turned oout to not be tthe case.

Point is, you dont ignore bbad behavior. You punish it. The buildingin which I work is replete with examples of folks who didn't receive such attention, tempered with love, but that's another story altogether.

msu_grad_121
11-22-2011, 09:43
Weird.

I dealt with my children (all four) differently. Instead of playing Dr. Spock with them, I dealt with them more decisively - I "gave" them a reason to cry. Oddly enough, a simple glance or at the most, a comment from me, now forestalls any rude, disrespectful, or boorish behavior. Even more odd - I noticed that, if left alone to their own devices, their behavior would continue to worsen UNTIL they got what they wanted ...or, what they thought they wanted, which turned oout to not be tthe case.

Point is, you dont ignore bbad behavior. You punish it. The buildingin which I work is replete with examples of folks who didn't receive such attention, tempered with love, but that's another story altogether.

Couldn't have said it better myself! Obviously someone knows better tho, and I'd be willing to lay odds that these spoiled, entitled, molly coddled brats' parents did exactly the same thing as that poster (walked away and ignored them), which is why these punks think these are appropriate ways to conduct themselves.

Furthermore, hamster, are you really suggesting that because UC Davis is taxpayer funded, the administration for that university and the police sworn to provide law enforcement services to it have no right to determine who is allowed to go where on that campus, and for how long? Well then, by your logic, anything taxpayer funded should be open to anyone claiming to be a taxpayer 24/7. See how that goes for your local library, or your state DMV or SOS. Be sure to explain your taxpayer theory to the local authorities when they are escorting you out or arresting you. Bonus points if you claim to pay their salaries.

You did say one thing that can't be argued with, hamster. And that is that you have no idea why they are protesting. Fact of the matter is, neither do they. That's okay though, because I'm sure their parents turned a blind eye to their temper tantrums as well, rather than instilling in them a sense of common courtesy and accountability when it comes to their actions impacting others, in this case, their freedom of movement.

Seeing as you are obviously so much better at dealing with this type of behavior in a gentle, yet wholly effective manner, please be sure to post the article that credits you with quelling the mass problems these protesters cause. Because after all, if you have the ability to stop a group of innocent protesters from suffering the ravages of evil pepper spray, and all the "civil-rights violating" which goes along with it, what kind of person would you be if you don't do something to help them?

Mayhem like Me
11-22-2011, 10:56
I guarantee you that these kids are totally willing to bait a Kent State episode in order to make their case.

So be expecting it, I hate to say, and also don't expect that "within the law" or "I was just following orders" to play out well on the stage of public opinion.

These kids are super media-savvy and much better organized (and educated) than most all of their uniformed adversaries.

They might very well be stinky hippie freaks but they're smart SHFs.

All of this is reverse entrapment for the cameras.


Trust me these kids are not smarter than their uniform brethren and certainly not as well organized. You used the term (better educated) that has no real meaning as it a subjective term.

Most of the agencies you see entagled with them have highly educated cops many holding advanced degrees that are actually working and paying taxes and using their education to solve peoples problems, not cause them..

When these dip****z can't get along with their roomate or mom and dad lock them out of the house, or the starbucks manager was mean and asked them to leave they call the cops becasue they have no problem solving skills.

Brucev
11-22-2011, 11:37
When dealing with non-violent civil protesters, it is easy to use do as you please, especially under color of law. Not much different here except the uniforms are not black and the emblems are not lightening bolts and the protesters are not being sorted for a final solution.

msu_grad_121
11-22-2011, 12:18
When dealing with non-violent civil protesters, it is easy to use do as you please, especially under color of law. Not much different here except the uniforms are not black and the emblems are not lightening bolts and the protesters are not being sorted for a final solution.

Officers acting under color of law, department policy, state statute and direct orders from their administration = nazis? Bruce, you really, REALLY need to seek professional help, because in your brain, Tab A definitely does not fit into Slot B.

By the way, the nazi thing is played out, at least get something original if you're going to ***** and moan about your comrades having "their civil rights violated," will ya? Thanks, pookie. :wavey:

cowboywannabe
11-22-2011, 12:27
Trust me these kids are not smarter than their uniform brethren and certainly not as well organized. You used the term (better educated) that has no real meaning as it a subjective term.

Most of the agencies you see entagled with them have highly educated cops many holding advanced degrees that are actually working and paying taxes and using their education to solve peoples problems, not cause them..

When these dip****z can't get along with their roomate or mom and dad lock them out of the house, or the starbucks manager was mean and asked them to leave they call the cops becasue they have no problem solving skills.

this statement needs to be followed by the SMACK sound effect from the Sonic commercials when the in your face semi epiphamy hits.....

wprebeck
11-22-2011, 12:44
When dealing with non-violent civil protesters, it is easy to use do as you please, especially under color of law. Not much different here except the uniforms are not black and the emblems are not lightening bolts and the protesters are not being sorted for a final solution.

I wear black BDU's for work. Does that help your thoughtless, overworn, baseless, useless, and ultimately more retarded than Jimmy Carter on a bad day analogy?

wprebeck
11-22-2011, 12:49
When dealing with non-violent civil protesters, it is easy to use do as you please, especially under color of law. Not much different here except the uniforms are not black and the emblems are not lightening bolts and the protesters are not being sorted for a final solution.

Auch, ich kann einbissgen Deutsch sprechen. Aber, ich sehe nicht die Zeigen "Arbeit macht Frei".

Pardon if its a little rusty, as I've not had a class in 20 years.

Morris
11-22-2011, 12:56
When dealing with non-violent civil protesters, it is easy to use do as you please, especially under color of law. Not much different here except the uniforms are not black and the emblems are not lightening bolts and the protesters are not being sorted for a final solution

How many of your family members disappeared into the camps during WWII there Bruce? A fair amount of mine did and yet, I manage to wear black and boots with a smile . . .

UCD officers were directed to clear the sidewalk by the administration. They did so, using a minimal amount of force to avoid injuries to the "kids" and themselves. Then the same administration that ordered them to clear them off the sidewalk *****es and moans to appease the "kids" to avoid liability for making the call in the first place.

But don't let facts get in the way of common sense. In fact, one group attempted to violate the rights of others. I'll let you decide which is which.

dooga
11-22-2011, 13:05
What exactly is their case?
Not even they know!

Chuck54
11-22-2011, 13:11
Regular or Extra Spicy ??

seagravedriver
11-22-2011, 13:47
Hamster, how far do they get to go, and how long do they get to do it? How do businesses feel in the city of Seattle or Portland where I have taken my family in the past? I have not set foot in either of those two cities for a meal since this started. Urine filled doorways stink.

The police are told to do something, they do it, and then they are tossed under a bus by a liberal big city mayor or other city officials. I have been pepper sprayed. As Homer Simpson said, "mmmmmm, incapacitating". It is irritating, and painful, but you get over it. Someday these people may be on your property, or in your way, and you will want something done. I would put money on the fact the officers knew they were being captured on video. If my kids were among those who got sprayed, I would wonder where I went wrong raising them. And if they truly feel they need to be out there, don't b*$ch when you get sprayed.

The-Fly
11-22-2011, 21:24
When dealing with non-violent civil protesters, it is easy to use do as you please, especially under color of law. Not much different here except the uniforms are not black and the emblems are not lightening bolts and the protesters are not being sorted for a final solution.



http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g20/glimmer_rat/TROLL.jpg

msu_grad_121
11-22-2011, 21:29
Fly, what do they say about great minds?! :rofl:

Check the UC Davis Pepper Spray thread!

mntrpr
11-22-2011, 21:36
Brucev This user is on your Ignore List. <----what i see

eaglefrq
11-22-2011, 22:05
When dealing with non-violent civil protesters, it is easy to use do as you please, especially under color of law. Not much different here except the uniforms are not black and the emblems are not lightening bolts and the protesters are not being sorted for a final solution.

Next time you need the police, make sure you dial 112. Let us know how long it takes to get some help.

Skunk Pilot
11-23-2011, 03:58
I guarantee you that these kids are totally willing to bait a Kent State episode in order to make their case.

So be expecting it, I hate to say, and also don't expect that "within the law" or "I was just following orders" to play out well on the stage of public opinion.

These kids are super media-savvy and much better organized (and educated) than most all of their uniformed adversaries.

They might very well be stinky hippie freaks but they're smart SHFs.

All of this is reverse entrapment for the cameras.


Trust me these kids are not smarter than their uniform brethren and certainly not as well organized. You used the term (better educated) that has no real meaning as it a subjective term.

Most of the agencies you see entangled with them have highly educated cops many holding advanced degrees that are actually working and paying taxes and using their education to solve peoples problems, not cause them..

When these dip****z can't get along with their roommate or mom and dad lock them out of the house, or the Starbucks manager was mean and asked them to leave they call the cops because they have no problem solving skills.

I'd have to add that just because they're reading a bunch of books doesn't make them necessarily "smart". Common Sense goes a very, very long way. Yes I graduated from college, but once you get out in the real world, things are a lot different.

Older people just have more life experience, I'd assume cops would have more in 3 years on the job, than some get in 5-10 years. Granted a broad statement, but I think to be a cop out on the street you get smart pretty quickly.

Well I guess the cops should of just given them all trophies for showing up to the protest and then they would of listened to them :shocked:

Granted I haven't followed this much at all, but can't the police call out the university and tell them they were told to and call them liars or something? If it's the truth, then why can't you say it?

Brucev
11-23-2011, 07:58
Officers acting under color of law, department policy, state statute and direct orders from their administration = nazis? Bruce, you really, REALLY need to seek professional help, because in your brain, Tab A definitely does not fit into Slot B.

By the way, the nazi thing is played out, at least get something original if you're going to ***** and moan about your comrades having "their civil rights violated," will ya? Thanks, pookie. :wavey:

I call it as I see it. Others justify their views spewing hatred, prejudice, etc. The comparison of uniforms and conduct toward protesters is pointed... like the point of a pen. It is intended to be pointed. It is intended to push. Nothing else gets any results. Happily this whole business is well documented by those who had and used video to record exactly what happened. No one will have to depend on what is said by either the administration, leo's or protesters. People can watch. And people can make up their own minds. And those on either side of the barrier's will just have to live with the decisions to which people come after they have watched the videos. That is far to be preferred over dependence upon sanitized official sources.

Brucev
11-23-2011, 08:06
I wear black BDU's for work. Does that help your thoughtless, overworn, baseless, useless, and ultimately more retarded than Jimmy Carter on a bad day analogy?

If a police officer wants to play army, let them join up. Otherwise, military type uniforms have no place on law enforcement officers. Period. As to jimmy carter... never gave him any thought. Can't figure why you'd be thinking of him.

m2hmghb
11-23-2011, 08:21
If a police officer wants to play army, let them join up. Otherwise, military type uniforms have no place on law enforcement officers. Period. As to jimmy carter... never gave him any thought. Can't figure why you'd be thinking of him.

Bruce you do realize that the first police uniforms took pieces from military uniforms. Hell look at the history of police, the medals are similar to medals. The military uses police tactics. To be honest bruce I wish you'd start using your brain to do research before making ludicrous statements, but it's never stopped you before.

Mayhem like Me
11-23-2011, 08:26
If a police officer wants to play army, let them join up. Otherwise, military type uniforms have no place on law enforcement officers. Period. As to jimmy carter... never gave him any thought. Can't figure why you'd be thinking of him.

BDU's are not Army uniforms, they are Utility uniforms, why don't you mature a little in your thinking, you sad, angry, little man.


Police are charged with breaking up civil disorders inside the country, you may want to brush up on your civics lessons and look at some of the riots over the years and what it took to quell them. Would you rather see Police dogs and fire hoses???

Your flippant and inmature attitude are not appreciated by those that actually put on the uniform and take the heat everyday, if you think you can do a better job pony up the nutsack and try, my guess is that you are a totally sub standard recruit and would be washed out of most hiring boards..

I for one applaud the videos , it shows direct disreguard for lawful orders, and as such the force used will eventually be ruled as justified,, Funny we have not heard more on that disgraced marine that claims to have been shot by a tear gas cannister, plenty of time for an ambulance chaser to pick that up, take a picture of the mark and match the size to known projectiles police use.



You are like a migrane , painfull and annoying for a length of time and you eventually go away leaving us with a memory of what a pain you are.

Leigh
11-23-2011, 08:26
[QUOTE=Brucev;18195653]If a police officer wants to play army, let them join up. Otherwise, military type uniforms have no place on law enforcement officers.

Hmm, let's see...the Armed Forces of ther United States has issued black BDU's since.....oh, how about NEVER.

BDU's are sturdier than most LEO uniforms and usually costs the officer or department much less $$$ and they last much longer.

Your constant anti-cop tripe has become pretty mundane.:upeyes:

Brucev
11-23-2011, 08:28
How many of your family members disappeared into the camps during WWII there Bruce? A fair amount of mine did and yet, I manage to wear black and boots with a smile . . . You have my sincere understanding regarding the death of your family members. We lost two, one who died in her apartment and one who died in a camp. There is no information on the rest of the extended family. But one of the children was sent by his mother to France where they were later reunited. They ended up in Chicago.

UCD officers were directed to clear the sidewalk by the administration. They did so, using a minimal amount of force to avoid injuries to the "kids" and themselves. Then the same administration that ordered them to clear them off the sidewalk *****es and moans to appease the "kids" to avoid liability for making the call in the first place. I would expect that the officers involved in the incident did not that day expect to be involved in such a thing. But, they were. And those who actually took part must now expect to be held accountable. That is how things work in a free society. Society is not subject to the state or its representatives, either those of the local or state govt. or those employed by a state institution. Accountability starts from the bottom and goes up. So these officers will be held accountable. And, as is routine in so many politically tinged matters, those higher up will talk... and talk... and talk. So it goes. Very seldom with those at the top be held accountable in any real meaningful way. Just look at the way things are playing out ala holder and obama in the Operation Fast and Furious scandal.

But don't let facts get in the way of common sense. In fact, one group attempted to violate the rights of others. I'll let you decide which is which. Not particularly impressed with inflated claims that these students were violating anyone's rights by sitting on the sidewalk. It's about the same as a kid putting used chewing gum on the bottom of a school desk. The officers conduct is being judged by society. And the videos that are being circulated are providing all the proof anyone needs to judge for themselves the validity of claims by the administration and the claims made by protesters. This will not ultimately be settled in a court room. This will be settled in the court of public opinion. Signs are that the verdict will not be in favor of the administration or the officers. That's how change is made... from the ground up. In the end it will be likely that the administration's purposes would have been better served had they instead sent cafeteria personnel out with burrito's and hot sauce.

Brucev
11-23-2011, 08:37
Next time you need the police, make sure you dial 112. Let us know how long it takes to get some help.

Happily I've never needed emergency services when I was in Europe. Once however, not in Europe but in New Orleans, LA, some folks decided to do some shooting. I was their target. When I was able to get to a phone, I called the police. If was 41 minutes before NOPD arrived. That was August of 1980. I learned something that night about criminals... and about depending on the police. I've always remembered that lesson. Perhaps things have changed.

Mayhem like Me
11-23-2011, 08:38
Not particularly impressed with inflated claims that these students were violating anyone's rights by sitting on the sidewalk. It's about the same as a kid putting used chewing gum on the bottom of a school desk. The officers conduct is being judged by society. And the videos that are being circulated are providing all the proof anyone needs to judge for themselves the validity of claims by the administration and the claims made by protesters. This will not ultimately be settled in a court room. This will be settled in the court of public opinion. Signs are that the verdict will not be in favor of the administration or the officers. That's how change is made... from the ground up. In the end it will be likely that the administration's purposes would have been better served had they instead sent cafeteria personnel out with burrito's and hot sauce.

FAIL it won't be judged in a court of public opinion or settled in one thats what FEELERs do..

It will be judged in a court of law, thats what THINKERS do...thats the problem with people like you, you ignore that we are not run by the media or public opinion and you think we are a democracy.. we are not. move to France and vote yourself free college.

Try THINKING instead of FEELING..

Brucev
11-23-2011, 09:04
Auch, ich kann einbissgen Deutsch sprechen. Aber, ich sehe nicht die Zeigen "Arbeit macht Frei".

Pardon if its a little rusty, as I've not had a class in 20 years.

Twenty years can make one rusty. Apparently your knowledge of German history is also rusty as "Arbeit macht Frei" is typically associated with what they now roundly acknowledge to be the dark side of their national story. If you wish to make a positive point about work, etc. You would be better served to reference "Heigh-Ho."

eaglefrq
11-23-2011, 09:37
Not particularly impressed with inflated claims that these students were violating anyone's rights by sitting on the sidewalk.

Actually, they are violating everyone's right to use the sidewalk. If I'm a student or faculty member, then I have every right to use that sidewalk. Why should I be forced to go around them or take another route? What about a person that is handicapped? (Let's not assume they would move or let you by because we don't know that)

If they want to protest, there looked like plenty of areas in the grass you could protest, chant, sing, hold signs, etc...If they want to use the sidewalk, that's fine, but they can't block access.

msu_grad_121
11-23-2011, 09:53
Happily I've never needed emergency services when I was in Europe. Once however, not in Europe but in New Orleans, LA, some folks decided to do some shooting. I was their target. When I was able to get to a phone, I called the police. If was 41 minutes before NOPD arrived. That was August of 1980. I learned something that night about criminals... and about depending on the police. I've always remembered that lesson. Perhaps things have changed.

Things can't have changed in your eyes because you refuse to see things as they are. You let your emotions rule your thought process, rather than reason and logic. One "bad" experience in which some police officers 3 decades ago were kinda-sorta involved and you hate everyone in a uniform forever? What does that sound like, logic or overblown emotion?

Sadly Bruce, you have fallen victim to the "news clip" mentallity. Watch the entire 10-minute video wherein these kids were given multiple, ample warnings not only by the officers but by their comrades and still made the conscious (and very ignorant) choice to continue blocking the path of the officers, an act they had exactly NO right to do. What's truly sad about the situation is that I can understand by Joe Blow would watch these video snippets and believe the claims of the protesters, but you imply through your condescending and snide remarks that you are better educated and more "in the know" than even other posters on this forum, which makes it doubly pathetic to see you let your emotions get the better of you and say completely ignorant things like "everyone in black uniform is a nazi."

Unfortunately, you can't legislate common sense, which both you and those entitled punks need a strong dose of.

msu_grad_121
11-23-2011, 10:04
Actually, they are violating everyone's right to use the sidewalk. If I'm a student or faculty member, then I have every right to use that sidewalk. Why should I be forced to go around them or take another route? What about a person that is handicapped? (Let's not assume they would move or let you by because we don't know that)

If they want to protest, there looked like plenty of areas in the grass you could protest, chant, sing, hold signs, etc...If they want to use the sidewalk, that's fine, but they can't block access.

You're giving them too much credit. They were absolutely intending to block access, and not just for faculty and students, moreso the police officers who had arrested their fellow scumbags, er, protesters, in an attempt to ensure they did not go to jail. These are simliar tactics used by OWS' "Black Knights" who have stated openly that their entire purpose for being is to obstruct the arrest of their fellow pukes.

What Bruce and all these overly emotional, common sense lacking tools don't seem to realize is that LE in general, and this situation in particular, is a wholly reactive business. It's not as though the officers were walking along in their helmets enjoying the sunny day and decided to go juice a group of people on a park bench. They were called there to enforce state and local laws and university policy, the protesters decided to violate the law to such a degree as to warrant arrest (and let's be honest, anyone who has stood a line against an angry mob knows you let A LOT of stuff slide), and then their fellow punks felt it was appropriate to surround the officers and bock their way around through both psychological intimidation and physical force.

If the people whining and crying for those "poor, innocent protesters" would just put aside their emotions for a moment and use reason instead of basing their decisions on their feelings, they'd see that the officer's actions were infinitely appropriate given the circumstances they faced. But of course, too much time spent in a classroom and too little actually doing anything that involves interacting with people will not allow them to do so. They'd rather talk tough behind a video camera or computer screen and draw comparisons to nazi death squads than see the world as it really is.

Oh well, as Ron White said, "You can't fix stupid."

cowboywannabe
11-23-2011, 11:18
i finally had to put that puke on the ignore list.......

just when you thought people couldnt get any more stupid, he dribbles the looney left mantras.

wprebeck
11-23-2011, 11:29
i finally had to put that puke on the ignore list.......

just when you thought people couldnt get any more stupid, he dribbles the looney left mantras.

How long you been in this line of work?

If there is one constant in this world, and career field, its ssimple -

You ain't seen it all yet, and there's always a dumber one waiting for you. Bruce is just tthe latestbdumb one. There will be more, have no doubt. The world might end, but there will still be that one dumbass who makes you wonder how he manages to live without someone reminding him to breathe.

cowboywannabe
11-23-2011, 11:59
i figured by the time a member has a few thousand posts ive already ignore listed him or her given ive had plenty of time to see the idiotic dribble they put out....guess i missed one until now....

I'M Glockamolie
11-23-2011, 12:49
In the end it will be likely that the administration's purposes would have been better served had they instead sent cafeteria personnel out with burrito's and hot sauce.

Hey, the police DID bring the hot sauce. Why couldn't the occupiers meet them half way with the burritos? The apostrophe in "burrito's" is unnecessary, by the way. That denotes either ownership, or a contraction.

<-------Not the police, but I AM a grammar NAZI. :)

cowboywannabe
11-23-2011, 13:05
Hey, the police DID bring the hot sauce. Why couldn't the occupiers meet them half way with the burritos? The apostrophe in "burrito's" is'NT unnecessary, by the way. That denotes either ownership, or a contraction.

<-------Not the police, but I AM a grammar NAZI. :)

zieg heil, my non spelling arian brother....:rofl:

cowboywannabe
11-23-2011, 13:06
Hey, the police DID bring the hot sauce. Why couldn't the occupiers meet them half way with the burritos? The apostrophe in "burrito's" is unnecessary, by the way. That denotes either ownership, or a contraction.

<-------Not the police, but I AM a grammar NAZI. :)

saved for you.

I'M Glockamolie
11-23-2011, 14:22
zieg heil, my non spelling arian brother....:rofl:

The apostrophe IS unnecessary in the word "burrito's" in his quote, brother. It's plural, as in more than one burrito. And the word would still have been "isn't", not "is'nt". The apostrophe goes between where the missing letter is. Any more (non)corrections? Thanks. :)

Morris
11-23-2011, 14:26
If a police officer wants to play army, let them join up. Otherwise, military type uniforms have no place on law enforcement officers. Period. As to jimmy carter... never gave him any thought. Can't figure why you'd be thinking of him.

Hmm, come to think of it, I did, as a forward air controller . . . for ten years . . . in BDUs and initially pickle suits. Funny thing is, I recall a certain German army uniform that was based off a certain state police agency in a certain century . . .

Hmm, funny world you live in, eh Bruce? Again, facts must be troubling for you.

Wait a minute, wasn't cowboy boots worn by marshals and peace officers of the day? Then they were converted into trooper boots worn by calvary officers. Then adopted by horse and motor officers. A bit of cross blending there.

Hell, I'll wear tactical pajamas if need be. The uniform doesn't define my career. I do.

cowboywannabe
11-23-2011, 14:52
reading is fundamental, and i didnt do it very well....LOL got all caught up in the dont spray me bro moment.

blastfact
11-23-2011, 21:38
I'm not a cop hater,,,, well I don't understand them some times. My new son inlaw is a Leo. Sweet dude and I hope he stays that way.

And I don't support the current group of protesters. But there are some real issues within there protest that mainstream America is paying attention to. As a group middle class America is watching. With the insider hill trading, the super comity failing. The very wealthy destroying poor folks 401k's trading blue chips like day traders did in penny stocks 10 years a go. Folks are getting stressed out.

I fear some very hard lines may be drawn in the streets by the middle class. They/We have the power, mass, guns and tools to go into combat. Folks think some of the Riots look bad in the UK or other places in the world cause folks want change or feel oppressed for what ever reason. They haven't seen a thing if armed middle class America get's fed up. Super power enforcement at some point runs into gorilla warfare.

I work within the HVAC and process world. From labors to craft and over educated idiots of the highest order. All of them are getting fed up with the system. And most don't see the cure in raising taxes on the rich or themselves. They see a government out of control, bankers and big business out of control. And no way to address the issue's be it at the local, state or federal level.

And while many Americans don't support the protesters. Most folks see them contained withing certain areas. And to a large degree controllable. These area's of protest are over all very small patches of land in a very big country.

Small actions can grow to big ones in a small amount of time. Honestly the Boston Tea Party was a very small action. It really was. But it was fuel for a larger action. A stepping stone if you will. Yes it worries me.

But I have my limits. For example. One morning I was in my truck heading north to go to Tulsa. 5 to 7 days a week I'm on hwy 75 heading north. I get pulled over one morning driving 5 mph under the speed limit. Turns out it's a full in your face felony stop! I'm like WTF? They want me to get out back up not looking at them. hit my knees and then lay on the ground like a freaking dog on command. I won't be ordered to lay down like a dog by anybody. Period end of subject. And I said as much. I'll lay down over the hot hood of your car, my truck spread eagle hands and legs were you want them,,, I surrender!!! But I wont do dog tricks for you! A local captin and K-9 officer got there. They know me. I helped the local PD get into internet crime and did my best free of charge getting this dumb-o-crat town up to speed. They called down the freaks, chewed on me a tad of which I wasn't going to take from them at all. Turns out there was a wife beater 13 miles south of my town in a white pickup. Turns out his was a cheavy, mine was a ford. I had okie plates. His were calie. My truck was white. BAM I'm the bad guy! So let's go full cop on him. Won't work with me.

So just in this example,,, how am I to trust the law to treat me with respect? And they expect me to treat them with respect? They did not trust me. But I'm to trust them?

Lets touch on the drug war or gang's. You come at warriors like a warrior. Whats the end result going to be? WAR! And it's a fact. You can't get enough cops to fight the gang's or drug lords. It ='s failure. You fight fire with fire,,, you end up with more fire. It makes no since. None what so ever. All that is created is gorilla warfare and you can't win. Nobody wins. Just a example.

Answer me this: My wife's nephew and his girl friend where murdered in a Tulsa park a few months ago. They were robbed, made to get on there knee's and both took a bullet in the head. His car, wallet and such were taken. The cops were baffled. Just another murder in Tulsa. His sister started texting the thugs that killed her brother. They had his cell. I got in my car and within 4 hours I had his car in my sights and she had one of the murders located through cell gps located with in 500'. After we did our job's then the cops did there's and made the arrest. After one of the murder's had done a local TV interview about how violent Tulsa and this park had became! Now the DA is telling the parent's they more than likely won't get the death sentence. Now I wonder if I should have waited on the cops and our corrupt system to do there jobs. I could have taken them out and done no more than 10 years in the long run.

The whole system is bankrupt.

RussP
11-23-2011, 22:30
I'm not a cop hater,,,, well I don't understand them some times.I read all of your posts. You say you do not hate cops, but those posts show that your dislike and disdain for law enforcement is very, very, very strong.

How long has your son-in-law been in law enforcement? Does he talk with you about his job? Not superficial small talk, but does he sit down and lay out the problems and issues, the good and the bad about his job? Does he do most of the talking or do you? Understanding one cop can be a challenge. Understanding two or three cops can be daunting to someone more use to talking than listening. Understanding "cops", as in understanding the business of being a cop, that takes a lot of time, patience and trust, a lot of the trust part. It isn't something you learn from reading a book, news reports, internet posts, stuff like that.

Oh, and until you get the chip off your shoulder, you ain't going to understand.

And, no, I am not a cop. I'm just a guy who has invested the time listening, shown the patience, and earned some of that trust.

If you'd like to pursue a discussion about the shortcomings of law enforcement as you see them, Cop Talk is not really the place. There is a forum specifically for that. Here is the link to Civil Liberties Issues (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=58) forum. Don't worry, you'll find both kindred souls who'll empathize with your feelings and some cops to maybe help you "understand".

larry_minn
11-23-2011, 23:34
If you request,demand for a Officer to spray you. Don't be surprised if he does.
From what I recall of UOF in late 80s I would have done dang near the same thing as Davis Officer. The only change is I liked short bursts with wind at my back (if possible) Never had to spray full in folks faces like the Officer on vidio did.

Lord Grey Boots
11-24-2011, 00:54
Back to the UC Davis thing. The protestors were allowed to protest, but not allowed to set up tents. The officers had been ordered by the Admin to take down the tents the protestors had setup. While doing that one idiot got arrested. After that the police were LEAVING. A crowd surrounded them, and set up a human chain around the cops.
This wasn't cops spraying protestors, it was cops spraying folks obstructing and illegally detaining the cops.

blastfact
11-24-2011, 01:58
Russ

Disdain is a good word. But on the upper in of the power scale, if you will.

As for my son inlaw. I look forward to seeing him in a few hours. We are working hard to understand each other. His concern's and mine. He and my pregnant daughter will walk in a few hours from now. We will hug. He will give me a peck on the cheek and say I love you dad. Then,,, when can you go shoot! :) He's been wanting to shoot the G-20 something awful. :) He was a grunt in the Army until a roadside bomb put the hurt on him. Instead of taking his ticket home he reup'ed and begged for a job. He became a MP. He wanted to be a career man. His wounds could not be bested. So he was discharged with honor and has a LEO life if he wanted it. Deep down in his gut he wants to be a firemen. But those jobs are really hard to come by here.

After he got out of the military. I got him hired at my co. as a grunt. With a good wage and a future if he wanted it. Had to keep food in my daughter belly yeah know. :) After three months his cop gig came through. He was glad to go.... lololololololol He couldn't deal with the 12 to 16 hour days and the mass confusion in a world that demands perfection. Fortune 500 Company's thinking they own you heart, mind and soul. Hospitals that can't go down, Labs and Fed junk that must in there minds eye always work when they screw it up.

I've got two really cool holiday bang gifts I can't wait to give him. :)

ChuteTheMall
11-24-2011, 07:31
zieg heil, my non spelling arian brother....:rofl:

Aryan.


:whistling:

MeefZah
11-24-2011, 09:31
My wife's nephew and his girl friend where murdered in a Tulsa park a few months ago. They were robbed, made to get on there knee's and both took a bullet in the head. His car, wallet and such were taken. The cops were baffled. Just another murder in Tulsa. His sister started texting the thugs that killed her brother. They had his cell. I got in my car and within 4 hours I had his car in my sights and she had one of the murders located through cell gps located with in 500'. After we did our job's then the cops did there's and made the arrest. After one of the murder's had done a local TV interview about how violent Tulsa and this park had became! Now the DA is telling the parent's they more than likely won't get the death sentence.

Link?

RussP
11-24-2011, 10:05
Link?http://www.newson6.com/story/15540364/funeral-services-held-for-hicks-park-murder-victims

Suspect...http://muskogeephoenix.com/local/x780405532/Suspect-in-Tulsa-slaying-has-criminal-history-in-Fort-Gibson

eaglefrq
11-24-2011, 10:47
Turns out there was a wife beater 13 miles south of my town in a white pickup. Turns out his was a cheavy, mine was a ford. I had okie plates. His were calie. My truck was white. BAM I'm the bad guy! So let's go full cop on him. Won't work with me.

First, I'm sorry for your families loss.

I'm not a police officer, but I did a shore duty tour (3 yrs) as base police, at NAS Memphis. While I was going through the Navy's LE Academy, we were given a first hand example of how witnesses can be unreliable. There were approx. 30 of us sitting in class and the instructor handed one of the students a card with a description on it. He was given 1 min to read and understand the description and then had to give the card back. He then turned around and told the description to the person behind him, while the class continued. The description was passed person to person to the last person in the room.

The instructor asked the last person for the description. The description he got was: Hawaiian male with a scar over or under (I can't remember now) his eye (no mention of which eye).

The instructor then read the card: It stated the suspect was a white male, gave his height/weight, hair/eye color, clothes worn and distinguishing marks (2 tattoos) and vehicle information. There was no mention of a scar.

Depending on the witnesses state of mind, emotions, etc...the descriptions get distorted. Also, the police can forget or not hear part of a description (they are human too) and depending on the crime, they are sometimes affected by it as well.

I'm not excusing their actions, just something for you to think about.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving

msu_grad_121
11-24-2011, 13:59
First, I'm sorry for your families loss.

I'm not a police officer, but I did a shore duty tour (3 yrs) as base police, at NAS Memphis. While I was going through the Navy's LE Academy, we were given a first hand example of how witnesses can be unreliable. There were approx. 30 of us sitting in class and the instructor handed one of the students a card with a description on it. He was given 1 min to read and understand the description and then had to give the card back. He then turned around and told the description to the person behind him, while the class continued. The description was passed person to person to the last person in the room.

The instructor asked the last person for the description. The description he got was: Hawaiian male with a scar over or under (I can't remember now) his eye (no mention of which eye).

The instructor then read the card: It stated the suspect was a white male, gave his height/weight, hair/eye color, clothes worn and distinguishing marks (2 tattoos) and vehicle information. There was no mention of a scar.

Depending on the witnesses state of mind, emotions, etc...the descriptions get distorted. Also, the police can forget or not hear part of a description (they are human too) and depending on the crime, they are sometimes affected by it as well.

I'm not excusing their actions, just something for you to think about.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving

Unfortunately, nothing anyone says is going to change his opinion of LE, no matter how much sense it makes. He's going to believe that the police should have known that he is 5'11, and the wife beater was 5'10 1/2, or that he was wearing glasses and the suspect had no glasses on, or some such. Hindsight is always 20/20, and nothing is ever good enough of an excuse for someone who is dead set in their opinion of LE being scumbags.

The reality is that you're right, witnesses are unreliable, dispatchers don't always give the entire description, officers sometimes hear it wrong or miss something, but to equate all that with some mailicious conspiracy is ridiculous. However, trying to explain that to a person of that type is like being Sisyphus, you'll never make any headway.

Oh well, can't save everyone...

Brucev
11-24-2011, 19:18
[QUOTE=Brucev;18195653]If a police officer wants to play army, let them join up. Otherwise, military type uniforms have no place on law enforcement officers.

Hmm, let's see...the Armed Forces of ther United States has issued black BDU's since.....oh, how about NEVER.

BDU's are sturdier than most LEO uniforms and usually costs the officer or department much less $$$ and they last much longer.

Your constant anti-cop tripe has become pretty mundane.:upeyes:

Cost? Durability? Hog wash. Produce standard law enforcement uniform that do not mimic military uniforms. Use the exact same fabric, in colors that are appropriate to a civilian application. Leave military type clothing to the military and those who want camouflage to wear in the woods.

Brucev
11-24-2011, 19:40
[QUOTE=swatbwana;18195704]BDU's are not Army uniforms, they are Utility uniforms, why don't you mature a little in your thinking, you sad, angry, little man. Projection. You need to get some professional help.


Police are charged with breaking up civil disorders inside the country, you may want to brush up on your civics lessons and look at some of the riots over the years and what it took to quell them. Would you rather see Police dogs and fire hoses??? Didn't major in pol. science... nor historical fiction. Could not care less about riots out of the 60's, etc. What is currently happening is not a riot. It is civil protest. The response of the police is crime.

Your flippant and inmature attitude are not appreciated by those that actually put on the uniform and take the heat everyday, if you think you can do a better job pony up the nutsack and try, my guess is that you are a totally sub standard recruit and would be washed out of most hiring boards.. Flippant? Probably in the eye of the beholder. Respect is not given. Respect is earned. I have nothing but respect for the officers who I know. Reading the hate and prejudice expressed by some who describe themselves as officers, I have for them no respect at all. They haven't earned it. Now if the issue is physical fitness... well my last football game was at age 48. We called it Jungle Ball... no blood no foul. We did not wear pads. No more of those as the knee won't take it. But I do routinely jog an average of 24-25 miles each week. In fact, as I type this I just recently returned home from running around the town. My dog Molly likes it. I am currently 198 lb., which is 13 lbs. more than I weighed when I graduated college in 1979.

I for one applaud the videos , it shows direct disreguard for lawful orders, and as such the force used will eventually be ruled as justified,, Funny we have not heard more on that disgraced marine that claims to have been shot by a tear gas cannister, plenty of time for an ambulance chaser to pick that up, take a picture of the mark and match the size to known projectiles police use. Lawful orders? Call it whatever you like. No different than the same approach used by others ... when they ordered folks to trains... and then into lines for sorting, etc. Orders... just not impressed when that becomes an excuse to try to muzzle political protest simply because those giving the orders don't like what is being said or who is saying it.

You are like a migrane , painfull and annoying for a length of time and you eventually go away leaving us with a memory of what a pain you are. It's nice to be appreciated.

Brucev
11-24-2011, 19:44
Bruce you do realize that the first police uniforms took pieces from military uniforms. Hell look at the history of police, the medals are similar to medals. The military uses police tactics. To be honest bruce I wish you'd start using your brain to do research before making ludicrous statements, but it's never stopped you before.

I recognize the need for effective well designed comfortable uniforms. What I do not recognize is the need for a civilian police officer to be dressed, outfitted, etc. in the manner of a soldier. I consider it absolutely unacceptable.

Brucev
11-24-2011, 19:51
FAIL it won't be judged in a court of public opinion or settled in one thats what FEELERs do..

It will be judged in a court of law, thats what THINKERS do...thats the problem with people like you, you ignore that we are not run by the media or public opinion and you think we are a democracy.. we are not. move to France and vote yourself free college.

Try THINKING instead of FEELING..

Very happily police are employed by those who pay the bills... taxpayers. And very happily those who make the decisions about how the police and other employes of the city, country, etc. operate are ... the folks elected by voters. Excellent. And... like it or not... those voters see the problematic videos that people produce when police get out of control. And these are the same folks who end up on juries... voting to determine verdicts. Imagine that! Not so hot for some. But absolutely excellent for those who walk the streets, the sidewalks, etc.

Brucev
11-24-2011, 19:54
Actually, they are violating everyone's right to use the sidewalk. If I'm a student or faculty member, then I have every right to use that sidewalk. Why should I be forced to go around them or take another route? What about a person that is handicapped? (Let's not assume they would move or let you by because we don't know that)

If they want to protest, there looked like plenty of areas in the grass you could protest, chant, sing, hold signs, etc...If they want to use the sidewalk, that's fine, but they can't block access.

Never have been impressed with someone wanting to tell someone else how they may exercise their Constitutional rights. And I don't recall any handicapped people having their access blocked by the protesters. Why before they started attacking the protesters, the police simply stepped over them... so even the police were not blocked.

Brucev
11-24-2011, 20:08
[QUOTE=msu_grad_121;18195960]Things can't have changed in your eyes because you refuse to see things as they are. You let your emotions rule your thought process, rather than reason and logic. One "bad" experience in which some police officers 3 decades ago were kinda-sorta involved and you hate everyone in a uniform forever? What does that sound like, logic or overblown emotion? At the present, I'm about as cool as ice. I certainly don't predicate my opinion of LEO's on a singular experience 30 years old. I simply address this issue based on what I see and hear at this site and similar sites. As to hatred... that is what has been expressed here on multiple occasions toward the protesters, etc.

Sadly Bruce, you have fallen victim to the "news clip" mentallity. Watch the entire 10-minute video wherein these kids were given multiple, ample warnings not only by the officers but by their comrades and still made the conscious (and very ignorant) choice to continue blocking the path of the officers, an act they had exactly NO right to do. What's truly sad about the situation is that I can understand by Joe Blow would watch these video snippets and believe the claims of the protesters, but you imply through your condescending and snide remarks that you are better educated and more "in the know" than even other posters on this forum, which makes it doubly pathetic to see you let your emotions get the better of you and say completely ignorant things like "everyone in black uniform is a nazi." I gauge my remarks for those to whom I am writing. Of course video clips show selected perspective. It is of course frustrating to see a incident presented in a less than full manner. I do not particularly care if the officers or anyone else spoke, pleaded, etc. for 10 minutes or 10 hours. I do not consider that the officers are qualified to decide how anyone may exercise their Constitutional rights. I applaud the protesters for staying in place. I applaud them for not reacting violently. News broadcast from a variety of sources show what people like "Joe Blow" think of those who were doing the spraying and those who ordered the spraying.

Unfortunately, you can't legislate common sense, which both you and those entitled punks need a strong dose of. Entitled? Punks? Looked at the videos and only saw people, men and women who are citizens of the community. Punks? They weren't any sitting on the sidewalks.

Brucev
11-24-2011, 20:13
Hmm, come to think of it, I did, as a forward air controller . . . for ten years . . . in BDUs and initially pickle suits. Funny thing is, I recall a certain German army uniform that was based off a certain state police agency in a certain century . . .

Hmm, funny world you live in, eh Bruce? Again, facts must be troubling for you.

Wait a minute, wasn't cowboy boots worn by marshals and peace officers of the day? Then they were converted into trooper boots worn by calvary officers. Then adopted by horse and motor officers. A bit of cross blending there.

Hell, I'll wear tactical pajamas if need be. The uniform doesn't define my career. I do.

Then you should have no problems with wearing a more traditional police uniform... the type that was worn before the shift came to militarizing law enforcement.

Line Rider
11-24-2011, 20:13
I love the smell of OC in the morning...It's like victory.

CAcop
11-24-2011, 22:44
I recognize the need for effective well designed comfortable uniforms. What I do not recognize is the need for a civilian police officer to be dressed, outfitted, etc. in the manner of a soldier. I consider it absolutely unacceptable.

I didn't realize the military wore 25 pound batbelts.

fuzzyduck
11-24-2011, 22:46
Just so I am aware of what is being suggested, what exactly is a "more traditional police uniform"? Cowboy hat, boots, six gun?

I am curious as I am wondering if mine is more or less traditional to you or anyone. I think that it is, up to and including materials that make it uncomfortable and at times dangerous

Morris
11-24-2011, 22:59
Then you should have no problems with wearing a more traditional police uniform... the type that was worn before the shift came to militarizing law enforcement.

Unlike you Bruce, I did. They were cost ineffective, wore out quickly and made no difference in how I did my job. Even the citizens didn't care as to the look so long as we did our job right. Again, that fact seems to escape you.

CAcop
11-24-2011, 23:32
Unlike you Bruce, I did. They were cost ineffective, wore out quickly and made no difference in how I did my job. Even the citizens didn't care as to the look so long as we did our job right. Again, that fact seems to escape you.

Our chief is dead set against patrol wearing 5.11 uniforms for dayshift patrol other than on rainy days.

Yet when I walking into the office of a local high school on a rainy day the assistant principal asked me why I was all dressed up in long sleeves.

As far as he was concerned I was wearing a dressy uniform since it was long sleeve vs. the short sleeves that are worn in the daytime 98% of the year.

eaglefrq
11-25-2011, 01:25
Never have been impressed with someone wanting to tell someone else how they may exercise their Constitutional rights. And I don't recall any handicapped people having their access blocked by the protesters. Why before they started attacking the protesters, the police simply stepped over them... so even the police were not blocked.

There weren't any handicapped people, that was a "what if" question. Based on the protesters previous actions, I don't think they would have moved for them anyway.

I've never been impressed when someone (protesters) impede me or make me go out of my way because they are upset and are not going to accomplish anything. What gives them the right to inconvenience others?

If you have a problem with the direction of this country and law enforcement, then quit being a keyboard commando and do something. Run for office, get elected and go to Washington and make some changes. Until you are willing to do that, then you are not part of the solution, so you must be part of the problem.

Mayhem like Me
11-25-2011, 05:43
Very happily police are employed by those who pay the bills... taxpayers. And very happily those who make the decisions about how the police and other employes of the city, country, etc. operate are ... the folks elected by voters. Excellent. And... like it or not... those voters see the problematic videos that people produce when police get out of control. And these are the same folks who end up on juries... voting to determine verdicts. Imagine that! Not so hot for some. But absolutely excellent for those who walk the streets, the sidewalks, etc.

And most agree with me most excellent indeed

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Brucev
11-25-2011, 07:34
Unlike you Bruce, I did. They were cost ineffective, wore out quickly and made no difference in how I did my job. Even the citizens didn't care as to the look so long as we did our job right. Again, that fact seems to escape you.

Your estimate of your experience or the opinion of others is only your own estimate. It is not definitive. Cost is irrelevant. Clothing is a consumable. You replace it. Like a salesman's car or shoes, it is the cost of doing business. As to suitability, the ultimate determinate is what the earlier referenced "Joe Blow" thinks. If the officer does not like the uniform, that is about like not liking the car issued, the pistols/calibers required, etc. The uniform worn is part of the image of law enforcement. This nation does not have a history of a militarized police force such as is not uncommon overseas. It does not need to start. Job performance would hopefully be at least to minimum professional standards. Periodic evaluation by a civilian board would at least help guarantee that that minimum standard was being met.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 07:41
There weren't any handicapped people, that was a "what if" question. Based on the protesters previous actions, I don't think they would have moved for them anyway.

I've never been impressed when someone (protesters) impede me or make me go out of my way because they are upset and are not going to accomplish anything. What gives them the right to inconvenience others?

If you have a problem with the direction of this country and law enforcement, then quit being a keyboard commando and do something. Run for office, get elected and go to Washington and make some changes. Until you are willing to do that, then you are not part of the solution, so you must be part of the problem.

The hypothetical nature of the "what if" question was recognized. Your opinion is of course your own. The Constitutional right of citizens to speak politically... even if that involves "protest" is not subject to opinion, mine or yours. Personally I have little use for what they protest. What I do very strongly support is their right to protest... regardless of how inconvenient anyone might find it.

Your suggestion to take concrete political action to address out of control law enforcement is well taken. I have always maintained a involvement in local politics... as well as ongoing relationships with local police officers. Happily in the communities and cities where I have lived, we've not had problems with officers who were abusive of individuals Constitutional rights. I would encourage you to also take the same steps.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 07:43
And most agree with me most excellent indeed

Delusional thinking. There is help available. Cool.

eaglefrq
11-25-2011, 09:56
The hypothetical nature of the "what if" question was recognized. Your opinion is of course your own. The Constitutional right of citizens to speak politically... even if that involves "protest" is not subject to opinion, mine or yours. Personally I have little use for what they protest. What I do very strongly support is their right to protest... regardless of how inconvenient anyone might find it.

Your suggestion to take concrete political action to address out of control law enforcement is well taken. I have always maintained a involvement in local politics... as well as ongoing relationships with local police officers. Happily in the communities and cities where I have lived, we've not had problems with officers who were abusive of individuals Constitutional rights. I would encourage you to also take the same steps.

Where I live, I have not had problems with officers who were abusive. In my opinion (we all know what opinions are), the officers didn't do anything wrong in this situation. It's obvious we will never agree on this situation.

As far as the uniforms issue goes, the cost factor is huge. Having recently retired from the Navy, I know the problem with uniforms that in my opinion are substandard when it comes to durability. If my uniform was damaged in the line of duty, I could fill out forms to have it replaced and then wait forever for a decision. If the uniform needs to be replaced due to wear and tear, then I was responsible for replacing it. I don't know if officers get a uniform allowance, but it can get very expensive if they don't.

If I have a uniform that costs $75 and I have to replace it every 4 months due to normal wear and tear, that's $225 out of my pocket (per uniform). If the dept wears BDU's at a cost of $100, but due to the durability they will last a year, then I'm saving $125 per uniform annually and most officers have at least 4-5 uniforms. That is a substantial cost to the officer and department, especially over time.

NOTE: My uniform estimates are purely guesses. I don't know the exact cost of the traditional uniforms or how long they last and the same goes for the BDU's. I do know BDU's last a lot longer due to their material type.

RussP
11-25-2011, 12:36
Then you should have no problems with wearing a more traditional police uniform... the type that was worn before the shift came to militarizing law enforcement.I have always maintained a involvement in local politics... as well as ongoing relationships with local police officers. Happily in the communities and cities where I have lived, we've not had problems with officers who were abusive of individuals Constitutional rights. I would encourage you to also take the same steps.Did this ongoing relationship involve telling them about your dislike for their uniforms?

msu_grad_121
11-25-2011, 12:37
What I do very strongly support is their right to protest... regardless of how inconvenient anyone might find it.


And this is where you are sadly, tragically mistaken and deluded. NO ONE, not you, not these molly coddled kids, no one has the right to interfere with ANYONE else's ability to perform their daily personal or job-related functions without due process or reasonable suspicion as defined by law. To do so subjects that person to the penalty of law (that'd be use of force and/or arrest, Bruce). As these officers were legally engaged in arresting subjects within the crowd for offenses they had committed, and then surrounded by that crowd in an attempt to block their egress, they have every legal right to use force to effect the arrest of or physically move those persons blocking their path so that they may complete the duty they set out to perform. The use of force was in no way, shape or form out of line with legal or tactical standards set forth by the governing law enforcement body, and as such I can only assume it was within department policy as well, as it would have been in every department with which I am even remotely familiar. Support their protest all you like, but realize that you don't have a legal, moral or ethical leg to stand on when you do.

RussP
11-25-2011, 12:44
Then you should have no problems with wearing a more traditional police uniform... the type that was worn before the shift came to militarizing law enforcement.Just so I am aware of what is being suggested, what exactly is a "more traditional police uniform"? Cowboy hat, boots, six gun?

I am curious as I am wondering if mine is more or less traditional to you or anyone. I think that it is, up to and including materials that make it uncomfortable and at times dangerousI am also curious about what is acceptable to you.

There are definite comfort and utility components to wearing BDU style shirts and pants.

fuzzyduck
11-25-2011, 13:41
To me personally, I think that function is very important. If your "traditional" uniform lets me work and do what I need to do, I am all for it. Personally cowboy boots don't do it. I need traction and ankle support so I can work. So long as the pants are not cotton (cotton kills in the cold) the whole uniform is durable (in these economic times, it is imparitive that both the agency and employee get the best bang for their buck) and the u.inform doesn't put the officer at add'l risk because it is hot reflective pink, I would wear it.

When someone suggests something is wrong, I appreciate a suggested remedy. What say you Bruce?

Morris
11-25-2011, 14:08
This nation does not have a history of a militarized police force such as is not uncommon overseas. It does not need to start. Job performance would hopefully be at least to minimum professional standards. Periodic evaluation by a civilian board would at least help guarantee that that minimum standard was being met.

Actually Bruce, it does. Your LE agencies are quasi-military in form and function for a reason: it instills discipline, clear channels of command and other cross blended functions. Much of the modern policing you embrace actually was derived from military models. Again, if you had actually been to the academy, anywhere, you would have learned police history. Uniforms at $120 a set do not make the officer, skill sets do.

Back to OC. It's a tool that was developed as a means to get compliance with minimal injury to a subject or officers (since both were being thrashed pretty well in hands on arrests). Since OC is not dangerous (unless you are allergic to peppers), it serves well to move crowds. In the case of Portland, it was doing a reasonably effective job.

RussP
11-25-2011, 15:26
Periodic evaluation by a civilian board would at least help guarantee that that minimum standard was being met.A few questions...At what level, Bruce?

Do you want each individual officer reviewed by your civilian board?

Who would appoint that civilian board?

What qualifications would one need to sit on your civilian board?

Who would oversee the civilian board?

Would the civilian board receive compensation and, if yes, from where?

Would there be reasonable standards of conduct established for your civilian board?I look forward to your answers.

RussP
11-25-2011, 15:40
This nation does not have a history of a militarized police force such as is not uncommon overseas. It does not need to start.What exactly makes a police force militarized?

You're upset at police wearing military uniforms, and we're waiting for your idea of a non-militarized uniform, so the clothes worn would be one.

How about listing what else makes up a militarized police force...
_____________________________
_____________________________
_____________________________
_____________________________
_____________________________
etc.

RussP
11-25-2011, 16:08
Cost is irrelevant. Clothing is a consumable. You replace it. Like a salesman's car or shoes, it is the cost of doing business.Cost? Durability? Hog wash. Produce standard law enforcement uniform that do not mimic military uniforms. Use the exact same fabric, in colors that are appropriate to a civilian application. Leave military type clothing to the military and those who want camouflage to wear in the woods.I don't remember if you carry a firearm for self defense or not, but I do. There are consumables involved in doing so, and I mean other than ammunition. Holsters and belts are among those consumables, aren't they.

Over in Carry Issues, people post regularly about why spend so much for a gun belt. The believe a good stiff work belt will do just as well, so they go out and buy that $25 work belt.

Well, a few months later they are back asking why it's become so uncomfortable to carry. Someone always asks, "Are you using a good quality gun belt?" They answer, no, it's an XYZ belt that just didn't last. After some conversation they decide to get a real belt designed to carry a holstered gun. Only problem is, the $80 gun belt has actually cost $80 + $25. Had they skipped the work belt...Do you get the picture?

Spending more up front for task specific uniforms can actually save the agency/officer money over the long run.

msu_grad_121
11-25-2011, 16:19
Spending more up front for task specific uniforms can actually save the agency/officer money over the long run.

The funny thing is, the officer or department is actually spending LESS per uniform, but getting a more durible product which is easier to care for, and almost universally agreed to be more comfortable. Personally, I'm a "form-follows-function" type of guy, which is why I never had any shiny or dangling stuff on any uniform, except for my Class A's. Add to that the cost of dry cleaning every time your uniform gets blood or dirt covered (happened A LOT for me) vs. throwing them in the washer and the choice is clear.

But of course, the hew and cry will continue to go up against this so-called "militarization of the police." What is ironic is that I find the uniforms at Hotdog On A Stick to look ridiculous, yet I don't complain about the "clowninization of the fast food industry." I just realize that I don't work there, and it's none of my friggin business what they choose or are made to wear. I just wish everyone else would do the same.

Mayhem like Me
11-25-2011, 16:31
Delusional thinking. There is help available. Cool.

LOOK at the public opinion of the occupiers and get back to me LOL you can't handle the truth...

I'm a well adjusted member of my community and sit on several non profit board of directors..

You just like to argue and lack the guts to go out and make a difference you sad little man...


Put on a uniform for 30 years like I did and still do and get back to me when you've notified a coupe dozen parents about their dead kids, or breathed life into an accident victim you pulled form a pool of gasoline, or suffer the stress of the 18 month old you couldn't save as mom wailed behind you save my baby save my baby..trust me this is a SMALL sampling ...i treat everyone I meet with dignity , they have to earn my respect, and if they choose to break the law I follow a simple set of rules, Ask , Tell, Make,, If I have to' make you' I will do it professionally , and quickly and depending on the level of resistance both may gethurt but you chose to go that far not me...

their are things you don't understand or are incapable of.. that's on you.

It does not change the fact that you are wrong in significant ways.


You have no idea how to police or what the job entails, nor do you have an educated opinion, you instead cling to dogma and ignorance, good luck with that .

jacquejet
11-25-2011, 16:49
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/pepperspray_answer.jpg

Brucev
11-25-2011, 18:16
To me personally, I think that function is very important. If your "traditional" uniform lets me work and do what I need to do, I am all for it. Personally cowboy boots don't do it. I need traction and ankle support so I can work. So long as the pants are not cotton (cotton kills in the cold) the whole uniform is durable (in these economic times, it is imparitive that both the agency and employee get the best bang for their buck) and the u.inform doesn't put the officer at add'l risk because it is hot reflective pink, I would wear it.

When someone suggests something is wrong, I appreciate a suggested remedy. What say you Bruce?

Just got home. The need for a durable and comfortable professional uniform is obvious and not disputed. The color(s) would surely be those standard colors used by individual agencies, perhaps a plain traditional blue uniform? For my part I simply do not consider that quasi-military styled uniforms are appropriate to a civilian police force.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 18:21
I don't remember if you carry a firearm for self defense or not, but I do. There are consumables involved in doing so, and I mean other than ammunition. Holsters and belts are among those consumables, aren't they. I have never routinely done cc. I am now looking into what must be done to be legally qualified to cc.

Over in Carry Issues, people post regularly about why spend so much for a gun belt. The believe a good stiff work belt will do just as well, so they go out and buy that $25 work belt.

Well, a few months later they are back asking why it's become so uncomfortable to carry. Someone always asks, "Are you using a good quality gun belt?" They answer, no, it's an XYZ belt that just didn't last. After some conversation they decide to get a real belt designed to carry a holstered gun. Only problem is, the $80 gun belt has actually cost $80 + $25. Had they skipped the work belt...Do you get the picture?

Spending more up front for task specific uniforms can actually save the agency/officer money over the long run. Your rational is certainly understandable. Durability, professional appearance and comfort would not seem to be an impossibility in a uniform that at the same time did not present the appearance of a military uniform.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 18:27
The funny thing is, the officer or department is actually spending LESS per uniform, but getting a more durible product which is easier to care for, and almost universally agreed to be more comfortable. Personally, I'm a "form-follows-function" type of guy, which is why I never had any shiny or dangling stuff on any uniform, except for my Class A's. Add to that the cost of dry cleaning every time your uniform gets blood or dirt covered (happened A LOT for me) vs. throwing them in the washer and the choice is clear.

But of course, the hew and cry will continue to go up against this so-called "militarization of the police." What is ironic is that I find the uniforms at Hotdog On A Stick to look ridiculous, yet I don't complain about the "clowninization of the fast food industry." I just realize that I don't work there, and it's none of my friggin business what they choose or are made to wear. I just wish everyone else would do the same.

If a uniform is made of fabric that can be machine washed, etc. rather than dry cleaned, fine. It does not however follow that use of such fabric requires it to be styled as a military uniform is styled. If a professionally styled uniform does not suit someone, perhaps they are in the wrong line of work. After all... one does not show up at a school to teach in shorts and a tank-top and then wonder at being told to go home and put on clothes appropriate for the classroom. As to the "militarization of the police," that objection will continue for the simple reason that the police are not soldiers in the military and do not need to be dressed, etc. as soldiers.

ChuteTheMall
11-25-2011, 18:35
:fred:

http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/4724/webearlynpd1870.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/341/webearlynpd1870.jpg/)

Meanwhile, back in 1870 Nashville, hickory > peppers.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 18:46
[QUOTE=swatbwana;18204956]LOOK at the public opinion of the occupiers and get back to me LOL you can't handle the truth... I am not particularly interested in what might be the various opinions of people about the protesters. I simply don't consider that Constitutional rights are to be determined by opinion or convenience, etc. I may not like such people. I may not like a lot of what they say. But I absolutely am determined that they have as unrestrained as possible opportunity to expressed their political views even if that inconveniences others or if others object to those views.

I'm a well adjusted member of my community and sit on several non profit board of directors.. Thank you for your service to your community.

You just like to argue and lack the guts to go out and make a difference you sad little man... Liking to argue is not one of my interest. Normally I would default to support police. In reading the statements made about the protesters, I was struck by what was in my view expressions of hatred, prejudice, etc. I was struck by the idea that these protesters were properly to be treated with extreme methods, etc. I objected. I still do. As to going out and making a difference, I do not live in any of the areas where such protest are being staged. Others who do have joined the protesters in support. As to sadness... no... not as a routine. One deals with the circumstances of life as they come. Sometimes that will bring joy. Other times, the response will be different.

Put on a uniform for 30 years like I did and still do and get back to me when you've notified a coupe dozen parents about their dead kids, or breathed life into an accident victim you pulled form a pool of gasoline, or suffer the stress of the 18 month old you couldn't save as mom wailed behind you save my baby save my baby..trust me this is a SMALL sampling ...i treat everyone I meet with dignity , they have to earn my respect, and if they choose to break the law I follow a simple set of rules, Ask , Tell, Make,, If I have to' make you' I will do it professionally , and quickly and depending on the level of resistance both may gethurt but you chose to go that far not me... I am sure you have conducted yourself as a professional in your career. I've not ever committed a crime nor have I had occasion to deal with a police officer where he thought I'd committed a crime. I know how my brother handled himself in his career as a deputy sheriff. I figure that to be a pretty high standard.

their are things you don't understand or are incapable of.. that's on you. I am sure there are many things that I do not understand. Incapable? I doubt it very seriously.

It does not change the fact that you are wrong in significant ways. Again, I do not pretend to be infallible.

You have no idea how to police or what the job entails, nor do you have an educated opinion, you instead cling to dogma and ignorance, good luck with that. I am not a policeman. There is likely much about the job that escapes common notice.

madcitycop
11-25-2011, 19:10
Oh here we go with this bull ****.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

RussP
11-25-2011, 19:31
Just got home. The need for a durable and comfortable professional uniform is obvious and not disputed. The color(s) would surely be those standard colors used by individual agencies, perhaps a plain traditional blue uniform? For my part I simply do not consider that quasi-military styled uniforms are appropriate to a civilian police force.Your rational is certainly understandable. Durability, professional appearance and comfort would not seem to be an impossibility in a uniform that at the same time did not present the appearance of a military uniform.If a uniform is made of fabric that can be machine washed, etc. rather than dry cleaned, fine. It does not however follow that use of such fabric requires it to be styled as a military uniform is styled. If a professionally styled uniform does not suit someone, perhaps they are in the wrong line of work. After all... one does not show up at a school to teach in shorts and a tank-top and then wonder at being told to go home and put on clothes appropriate for the classroom. As to the "militarization of the police," that objection will continue for the simple reason that the police are not soldiers in the military and do not need to be dressed, etc. as soldiers.You object to the militarization of police departments. Let's start at the beginning.

Basic armament for officers use to be a sidearm, a pistol. Sergeants carried a shotgun, too. Only SWAT teams carried rifles. After a little shootout with bad guys wearing body armor and armed with AK-47s, basic armament changed to include rifles in squad cars, M-16s and later other military AR style rifles.

Do you object to individual officers carrying AR style rifles?

fuzzyduck
11-25-2011, 19:43
I would really like to SEE an example of a non militaristic uniform in your opinion Bruce. I ask because I am genuinely interested. What I see is that you think they are too militaristic and while I may not agree, I respect you opinion on this matter because you brought it up. Do you have any photos of what you envision? I can agree to not bring up specific fabrics because we could go on and on about 50/50 poly cotton, 100% wool etc, but the style is what I am interested in.

RussP
11-25-2011, 19:52
Just quoting and adding quotes to make for easier reading.LOOK at the public opinion of the occupiers and get back to me LOL you can't handle the truth... I am not particularly interested in what might be the various opinions of people about the protesters. I simply don't consider that Constitutional rights are to be determined by opinion or convenience, etc. I may not like such people. I may not like a lot of what they say. But I absolutely am determined that they have as unrestrained as possible opportunity to expressed their political views even if that inconveniences others or if others object to those views.

I'm a well adjusted member of my community and sit on several non profit board of directors.. Thank you for your service to your community.

You just like to argue and lack the guts to go out and make a difference you sad little man... Liking to argue is not one of my interest. Normally I would default to support police. In reading the statements made about the protesters, I was struck by what was in my view expressions of hatred, prejudice, etc. I was struck by the idea that these protesters were properly to be treated with extreme methods, etc. I objected. I still do. As to going out and making a difference, I do not live in any of the areas where such protest are being staged. Others who do have joined the protesters in support. As to sadness... no... not as a routine. One deals with the circumstances of life as they come. Sometimes that will bring joy. Other times, the response will be different.

Put on a uniform for 30 years like I did and still do and get back to me when you've notified a coupe dozen parents about their dead kids, or breathed life into an accident victim you pulled form a pool of gasoline, or suffer the stress of the 18 month old you couldn't save as mom wailed behind you save my baby save my baby..trust me this is a SMALL sampling ...i treat everyone I meet with dignity , they have to earn my respect, and if they choose to break the law I follow a simple set of rules, Ask , Tell, Make,, If I have to' make you' I will do it professionally , and quickly and depending on the level of resistance both may gethurt but you chose to go that far not me... I am sure you have conducted yourself as a professional in your career. I've not ever committed a crime nor have I had occasion to deal with a police officer where he thought I'd committed a crime. I know how my brother handled himself in his career as a deputy sheriff. I figure that to be a pretty high standard.

their are things you don't understand or are incapable of.. that's on you. I am sure there are many things that I do not understand. Incapable? I doubt it very seriously.

It does not change the fact that you are wrong in significant ways. Again, I do not pretend to be infallible.

You have no idea how to police or what the job entails, nor do you have an educated opinion, you instead cling to dogma and ignorance, good luck with that. I am not a policeman. There is likely much about the job that escapes common notice.

msu_grad_121
11-25-2011, 20:17
Police uniforms are in every way, shape and form styled on military uniforms. Class A police uniforms more often than not bear more than a strikin resemblance to the Dress unforms of military branches, the only exception being the color of the fabric. So, where do you get this idea that in some far off fantasy land police officers once upon a time wore a uniform that sprang from someone's imagination and had absolutely no resemblence to ANY military uniform ever? Do all the research you like, and take as long as you want, I'm hourly.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 20:40
Police uniforms are in every way, shape and form styled on military uniforms. Class A police uniforms more often than not bear more than a strikin resemblance to the Dress unforms of military branches, the only exception being the color of the fabric. So, where do you get this idea that in some far off fantasy land police officers once upon a time wore a uniform that sprang from someone's imagination and had absolutely no resemblence to ANY military uniform ever? Do all the research you like, and take as long as you want, I'm hourly.

Thank you for your response. The error in specifics is my own. I said military style. That was my mistake. I had in mind the sort of uniform one typically sees soldiers wearing in combat operations.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 20:51
I would really like to SEE an example of a non militaristic uniform in your opinion Bruce. I ask because I am genuinely interested. What I see is that you think they are too militaristic and while I may not agree, I respect you opinion on this matter because you brought it up. Do you have any photos of what you envision? I can agree to not bring up specific fabrics because we could go on and on about 50/50 poly cotton, 100% wool etc, but the style is what I am interested in. I object to the use of the sort of uniforms commonly seen on soldiers involved in combat operations. As to the uniform in particular, what problems would there be with slacks and a shirt... such as one routinely sees worn by the State Patrol in my state, the Officers in various sheriff's departments, and even what is worn by so many city and town policemen?

Brucev
11-25-2011, 20:59
You object to the militarization of police departments. Let's start at the beginning.

Basic armament for officers use to be a sidearm, a pistol. Sergeants carried a shotgun, too. Only SWAT teams carried rifles. After a little shootout with bad guys wearing body armor and armed with AK-47s, basic armament changed to include rifles in squad cars, M-16s and later other military AR style rifles.

Do you object to individual officers carrying AR style rifles?

I remember the incident to which you refer. It was certainly the exception. I've been in places where police routinely patrol carrying sub-machine guns. Of course those were places where the police were hardly to be distinguished from the military. I do not consider such weapons to have a routine place in a civilian police force any more than I consider stun grenades and armored personnel carriers to have a place in routine police work. I do not consider that such weapons have any place at all in routine police work except on those rare occasions which are not the routine when a situation warrants it.

Vigilant
11-25-2011, 21:03
Why argue with people like this?

Bruce, you're absolutely right. Have a nice day.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 21:04
Did this ongoing relationship involve telling them about your dislike for their uniforms? The officers on our local poice force and the country sheriff's office do not wear uniforms that look like the sort of thing one would expect to see worn by a soldier in combat operations. They wear what looks like a common police/sheriff's deputy uniform of pants and shirt, etc.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 21:16
And this is where you are sadly, tragically mistaken and deluded. NO ONE, not you, not these molly coddled kids, no one has the right to interfere with ANYONE else's ability to perform their daily personal or job-related functions without due process or reasonable suspicion as defined by law. To do so subjects that person to the penalty of law (that'd be use of force and/or arrest, Bruce). As these officers were legally engaged in arresting subjects within the crowd for offenses they had committed, and then surrounded by that crowd in an attempt to block their egress, they have every legal right to use force to effect the arrest of or physically move those persons blocking their path so that they may complete the duty they set out to perform. The use of force was in no way, shape or form out of line with legal or tactical standards set forth by the governing law enforcement body, and as such I can only assume it was within department policy as well, as it would have been in every department with which I am even remotely familiar. Support their protest all you like, but realize that you don't have a legal, moral or ethical leg to stand on when you do.

Whether molly coddled kids or out of control police, the Constitution determines what people can/can not do with regard to protest, political speech/action, etc. This is not the first nor will it be the last time when that boundary will be explored... and possibly adjusted. The courts will decide the legality of actions taken, not the police who took those actions nor the administration that gave the orders. If the actions taken are affirmed as legal, then it will simply require that departments be instructed to change their standards.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 21:31
[QUOTE=RussP;18204766]A few questions...At what level, Bruce?

Do you want each individual officer reviewed by your civilian board? Yes, if as in the above case there were good reason to consider that the officer had acted inappropriately.

Who would appoint that civilian board? In a city... those persons elected, i.e., the council, board, etc.

What qualifications would one need to sit on your civilian board? The same as a Sheriff? Is it required that one have law enforcement experience to run for and be elected to the office office of Sheriff? Is one expected to have experience in corrections to be appointed to a parole board? Realistically some knowledge of law enforcement might be helpful. But more important would be common sense.

Who would oversee the civilian board? Why would they need oversight? Would not the courts serve to check any excesses that might occur?

Would the civilian board receive compensation and, if yes, from where? Perhaps if there were few inciidents requiring review, those serving might do so voluntarily. Otherwise, compensation would be from the responsible governing body.

Would there be reasonable standards of conduct established for your civilian board? Would the courts not be competent to review any issues with the board?
I look forward to your answers.

RussP
11-25-2011, 21:34
I remember the incident to which you refer. It was certainly the exception.It was the exception at that time that would have ended very differently had street cops had rifles, wouldn't you agree? I've been in places where police routinely patrol carrying sub-machine guns. Of course those were places where the police were hardly to be distinguished from the military. Yes, there are such countries. Do you believe it is inappropriate for those police forces in those countries to carry the weapons they do?I do not consider such weapons to have a routine place in a civilian police force How often do you see sub-machine guns carried by police in this country. What are the circumstances under which they are carrying those sub-machine guns?any more than I consider stun grenades and armored personnel carriers to have a place in routine police work. I do not consider that such weapons have any place at all in routine police work except on those rare occasions which are not the routine when a situation warrants it.So you are saying that stun grenades and armored personnel carriers are used in routine daily police work? Do you have an example, a link to a story where they were used on a routine case?

RussP
11-25-2011, 22:10
You really need to practice using quotes appropriately.At what level, Bruce?

Do you want each individual officer reviewed by your civilian board?Yes, if as in the above case there were good reason to consider that the officer had acted inappropriately.

Who would appoint that civilian board? In a city... those persons elected, i.e., the council, board, etc.

What qualifications would one need to sit on your civilian board? The same as a Sheriff? Is it required that one have law enforcement experience to run for and be elected to the office office of Sheriff? Is one expected to have experience in corrections to be appointed to a parole board? Realistically some knowledge of law enforcement might be helpful. But more important would be common sense.

Who would oversee the civilian board? Why would they need oversight? Would not the courts serve to check any excesses that might occur?

Would the civilian board receive compensation and, if yes, from where? Perhaps if there were few inciidents requiring review, those serving might do so voluntarily. Otherwise, compensation would be from the responsible governing body.Wow, have you given this very much thought?

You want a board of political appointees, serving voluntarily without compensation, who have, or may not have, law enforcement experience or knowledge, a group that someone, somehow determines has common sense, serving without oversight, to review individual officers and their performance of duty.

As to your Sheriff analogy, can you cite some recent elections in major jurisdictions where individuals without a law enforcement background were elected as Sheriffs?

And the parole board thing, you are equating the appointment to your civilian board with appointments to parole boards? Interesting how you did that...very interesting.

Would there be reasonable standards of conduct established for your civilian board? Would the courts not be competent to review any issues with the board? Why would it be the court?

Your idea as presented has a number of faults.

Brucev
11-25-2011, 22:20
[QUOTE=RussP;18206070]It was the exception at that time that would have ended very differently had street cops had rifles, wouldn't you agree? Terrorists used airliners to kill thousands of people on 9/11, but the USA doesn't keep armed fighter planes in the air to fly by every airliner in the air. Such things are the exception. They are not the routine/norm.

Yes, there are such countries. Do you believe it is inappropriate for those police forces in those countries to carry the weapons they do? Absolutely without equivocation, yes.

How often do you see sub-machine guns carried by police in this country. The one recent incident I recall was a sheriff deputy escorting Casey Anthony down a hallway.

What are the circumstances under which they are carrying those sub-machine guns?So you are saying that stun grenades and armored personnel carriers are used in routine daily police work? Do you have an example, a link to a story where they were used on a routine case? Links are available. Cp. "Police use armored equipment?" for a Google search.

Morris
11-25-2011, 22:22
All this is doing is wanting me to pop up some popcorn.

Put your orders in now fellas.

eaglefrq
11-25-2011, 22:31
All this is doing is wanting me to pop up some popcorn.

Put your orders in now fellas.

Large, with extra butter please.

m2hmghb
11-25-2011, 22:39
Large, extra butter, hold the patchouli oil please.

RussP
11-26-2011, 09:41
I'll pass for now...little busy. :cool:

RussP
11-26-2011, 09:42
Again, learn to use the quote function or use a different colored font, a readable color, for your responses.It was the exception at that time that would have ended very differently had street cops had rifles, wouldn't you agree? Terrorists used airliners to kill thousands of people on 9/11, but the USA doesn't keep armed fighter planes in the air to fly by every airliner in the air. Such things are the exception. They are not the routine/norm.You did not answer the question, Brucev. Wouldn't you agree that weapons comparable to or superior to what the bad guys carried would have resulted in a more favorable outcome for law enforcement?

Your comparison of cops carrying rifles to fighter escorts for commercial passenger planes is way off balance.

Yes, there are such countries. Do you believe it is inappropriate for those police forces in those countries to carry the weapons they do? Absolutely without equivocation, yes. Good, now please tell us what countries those are so everyone can decide if they agree with your evaluation.

How often do you see sub-machine guns carried by police in this country. The one recent incident I recall was a sheriff deputy escorting Casey Anthony down a hallway.There was nothing unique about the circumstances surrounding her? Had she received death threats? Or, was she just another person going through the system?

What are the circumstances under which they are carrying those sub-machine guns?So you are saying that stun grenades and armored personnel carriers are used in routine daily police work? Do you have an example, a link to a story where they were used on a routine case? Links are available. Cp. "Police use armored equipment?" for a Google search.Good, "links are available", so how about posting a few that best illustrate your position.

Brucev, let me ask you these questions. If police were to stop carrying all this heavier weaponry, will the bad guys do likewise? Will the bad guys turn in their heavy weaponry as well? Will this be a bilateral disarmament?

Do you believe that as Occupiers and others become more frustrated because no one in government is paying any attention to them, the chance of them turning from non-violent to violent will increase?

In your years of ongoing relationships with local police officers, have you been on many ride-alongs?

Also, where you live, where you have those ongoing relationships with local police officers, what's the population? That's an important question for context.

RussP
11-26-2011, 19:13
All this is doing is wanting me to pop up some popcorn.

Put your orders in now fellas.Large, with extra butter please.Large, extra butter, hold the patchouli oil please.I'll pass for now...little busy. :cool:Morris, you still serving...things suddenly got quiet...Large, light butter if you are. :cool:

Misty02
11-26-2011, 19:32
I remember the incident to which you refer. It was certainly the exception. I've been in places where police routinely patrol carrying sub-machine guns. Of course those were places where the police were hardly to be distinguished from the military. I do not consider such weapons to have a routine place in a civilian police force any more than I consider stun grenades and armored personnel carriers to have a place in routine police work. I do not consider that such weapons have any place at all in routine police work except on those rare occasions which are not the routine when a situation warrants it.

More than a handful of times (way more often) in the last couple of years criminals have used weapons described to be AK-47 in the streets of Miami-Dade County. Would you have officers in those particular areas armed with just their pistols? How can anyone be effective in their defense or defense of others unless they possess similar tools (and superior skill) or superior tools?

.

ChuteTheMall
11-26-2011, 20:02
I've seen both local cops and building guards holding subguns, which appeared to be some variant of the ubiquitous H&K MP5 series.

The local cops were answering a 911 phone call where the occupants refused to answer repeated knocks to the door. The whole SWAT team hung around for hours, subgunners near the door behind a policewoman, others mostly outside, some holding shotguns, some semi-plainclothes.

The uniformed building guards were just standing at a garage entrance watching me drive by in slow rush hour traffic. I wonder who was inside?

:popcorn:

I'll take a liberal dose of pepper spray on my popcorn, please.

http://i39.tinypic.com/2v029gz.gif

:shocked:


























.

Morris
11-27-2011, 09:32
I'll take a liberal dose of pepper spray on my popcorn, please.

I had a guy who actually liked to have that stuff on his popcorn. Real freak.

Vigilant
11-27-2011, 12:51
I will admit, I LOVE the smell of Def Tec 10%... even while I'm choking on the fumes.

msu_grad_121
11-27-2011, 13:06
I will admit, I LOVE the smell of Def Tec 10%... even while I'm choking on the fumes.

I'm the same way with Freeze +P, at least for the first second or 2, then the coughing begins! It's so sweet and then sooooo painful!

Morris
11-27-2011, 13:23
Many years ago, I was training a group of Zoo security officers (really!) for carrying OC. We did the usual hands on application method and experience drills. This one officer stood there and took the full face full. He sneezed, wiped a sleeve over his face and said, "Is that all?!" Their stuff as the time was 10% 2MIL SHU. I was pretty impressed.

He explained that coming from India and with his diet, the OC really didn't do anything for him.

Brucev
11-27-2011, 13:28
Again, learn to use the quote function or use a different colored font, a readable color, for your responses.You did not answer the question, Brucev. Wouldn't you agree that weapons comparable to or superior to what the bad guys carried would have resulted in a more favorable outcome for law enforcement? The standard pistols and shotguns are more than sufficient. If on a rare occasion rifles, etc. are needed, bring in the SWAT team.

Your comparison of cops carrying rifles to fighter escorts for commercial passenger planes is way off balance. The idea of officers routinely carrying full-auto M-4's as though they must be prepared to fight off a terrorist operation is also way off balance.

Good, now please tell us what countries those are so everyone can decide if they agree with your evaluation. I was in Greece and Turkey when I saw the sub-machine guns.

There was nothing unique about the circumstances surrounding her? Had she received death threats? Or, was she just another person going through the system? Google it. I saw it on t.v. I didn't give it detailed attention.

Good, "links are available", so how about posting a few that best illustrate your position. If you or others have that much interest, google away.

Brucev, let me ask you these questions. If police were to stop carrying all this heavier weaponry, will the bad guys do likewise? Will the bad guys turn in their heavy weaponry as well? Will this be a bilateral disarmament?

Do you believe that as Occupiers and others become more frustrated because no one in government is paying any attention to them, the chance of them turning from non-violent to violent will increase? Didn't see anyone acting violently. Saw people sitting with arms linked while they were sprayed, etc.

In your years of ongoing relationships with local police officers, have you been on many ride-alongs? Ride-alongs? No. It never occurred to me. I would not have thought it proper for anyone to simply ride in the car with an officer while he was on duty.

Also, where you live, where you have those ongoing relationships with local police officers, what's the population? That's an important question for context. The population of this city is =/-33,000.

Brucev
11-27-2011, 13:53
More than a handful of times (way more often) in the last couple of years criminals have used weapons described to be AK-47 in the streets of Miami-Dade County. Would you have officers in those particular areas armed with just their pistols? How can anyone be effective in their defense or defense of others unless they possess similar tools (and superior skill) or superior tools? Pistols and shotguns would suffice for just about any situation that might be faced. The idea that a weapons race is necessary, etc. is farfetched and unsupported.

msu_grad_121
11-27-2011, 14:11
Pistols and shotguns would suffice for just about any situation that might be faced. The idea that a weapons race is necessary, etc. is farfetched and unsupported.

If pistols and shotguns were all that were necessary to face someone with any sort of assault or battle rifle, why would any military in the world go through the time, cost and trouble to field and deploy anything heavier to their troops? Bruce, on this one, you are beyond mistaken, but by all means, if you feel comfortable responding to an incident wherein your opponent has a rifle with only your pistol, I'd say have at it. Simply because it hurts your feelings to see someone carrying a rifle, smg, etc. does not mean that it is unnecessary, and on this subject you are completely out of touch with reality.

Brucev
11-27-2011, 14:26
If pistols and shotguns were all that were necessary to face someone with any sort of assault or battle rifle, why would any military in the world go through the time, cost and trouble to field and deploy anything heavier to their troops? Bruce, on this one, you are beyond mistaken, but by all means, if you feel comfortable responding to an incident wherein your opponent has a rifle with only your pistol, I'd say have at it. Simply because it hurts your feelings to see someone carrying a rifle, smg, etc. does not mean that it is unnecessary, and on this subject you are completely out of touch with reality.

With respect, police are not combat soldiers. They are not at war. There is no reason for them to be armed and equipped like they routinely have to engage in urban combat. The need is overblown. Occasions will arise when more than pistols and shotguns are needed. But those occasions are not the norm. I cannot see any need for policemen to be equipped like combat soldiers for their normal routine everyday activities.

Vigilant
11-27-2011, 14:49
With respect, police are not combat soldiers. They are not at war. There is no reason for them to be armed and equipped like they routinely have to engage in urban combat. The need is overblown. Occasions will arise when more than pistols and shotguns are needed. But those occasions are not the norm. I cannot see any need for policemen to be equipped like combat soldiers for their normal routine everyday activities.

Police are not at war. Now that one takes the cake.

msu_grad_121
11-27-2011, 14:59
With respect, police are not combat soldiers. They are not at war. There is no reason for them to be armed and equipped like they routinely have to engage in urban combat. The need is overblown. Occasions will arise when more than pistols and shotguns are needed. But those occasions are not the norm. I cannot see any need for policemen to be equipped like combat soldiers for their normal routine everyday activities.

An AK-47 is an AK-47 whether wielded by a Taliban soldier in Afghanistan or some gang bangin thug here in the streets of America. The need for comparable or superior equipment and training is just as real for a police officer patrolling your streets as it is for a soldier or Marine fighting overseas. As for police officers being equipped like combat soldiers, I would say that if having access to one piece of equipment (in this case a rifle or smg) that is in some ways similiar to a piece of equipment used by our military means that to you they are fully equipped and on par with every soldier who has ever gone to war, then there's nothing I can say, because you have taken a small example and blown it far, far out of proportion. I truly feel sorry for you, Bruce, as you just refuse to face reality.

Cubdriver
11-27-2011, 15:00
The standard pistols and shotguns are more than sufficient. If on a rare occasion rifles, etc. are needed, bring in the SWAT team.

And what are the responding officers supposed to do (on those rare occasions when standard pistols and shotguns prove NOT to be sufficient) while the SWAT team is rallied and dispatched? Hope and pray? Suppose whoever they're engaging takes them out in the meantime. Do you expect the baddies to hang out and wait for the SWAT team to arrive?

I'd give more credit to your oppposition of weapons like M4s in police hands if you would cite a few instances of their being misused by said police.

-Pat

Vigilant
11-27-2011, 15:11
You just like to argue and lack the guts to go out and make a difference, you sad little man...


You have no idea how to police or what the job entails, nor do you have an educated opinion, you instead cling to dogma and ignorance, good luck with that .

Condensed for clarity. 'Nuff said.

msu_grad_121
11-27-2011, 15:13
The standard pistols and shotguns are more than sufficient. If on a rare occasion rifles, etc. are needed, bring in the SWAT team.

Sitting back and waiting for the SWAT team to respond worked out well for the officers in Littleton, Colorado, at the Columbine massacre, didn't it? Oh wait...

Morris
11-27-2011, 17:16
Lord and lady, this thread is getting more stupid by the post of Bruce . . .

Ignorance is bliss, I suppose.

Ya know Bruce, I'll give you credit. You remain dogmatic with zero practical knowledge and you are certainly entitled to your opinion, no matter how flawed it may be.

RussP
11-27-2011, 18:42
Again, learn to use the quote function or use a different colored font, a readable color, for your responses.Thank you.You did not answer the question, Brucev. Wouldn't you agree that weapons comparable to or superior to what the bad guys carried would have resulted in a more favorable outcome for law enforcement? The standard pistols and shotguns are more than sufficient. If on a rare occasion rifles, etc. are needed, bring in the SWAT team. What experience do you have that qualifies you to say standard pistols and shotguns are more than sufficient armament? What are your qualifications?Your comparison of cops carrying rifles to fighter escorts for commercial passenger planes is way off balance. The idea of officers routinely carrying full-auto M-4's as though they must be prepared to fight off a terrorist operation is also way off balance.No, it is very realistic for departments operating in jurisdictions where it is known that bad guys are heavily armed. Now, in your town it might not be necessary. You can't judge the needs of everyone based on your small town perspective.Good, now please tell us what countries those are so everyone can decide if they agree with your evaluation. I was in Greece and Turkey when I saw the sub-machine guns.Thanks, those two countries have modern histories of violence far exceeding ours.There was nothing unique about the circumstances surrounding her? Had she received death threats? Or, was she just another person going through the system? Google it. I saw it on t.v. I didn't give it detailed attention. So you used an example without researching the situation. Good.Good, "links are available", so how about posting a few that best illustrate your position. If you or others have that much interest, google away. So you have not researched this either.
Brucev, let me ask you these questions. If police were to stop carrying all this heavier weaponry, will the bad guys do likewise? Will the bad guys turn in their heavy weaponry as well? Will this be a bilateral disarmament? Why no response? Is it that you realize that the bad guys ain't gonna play by your rules?Do you believe that as Occupiers and others become more frustrated because no one in government is paying any attention to them, the chance of them turning from non-violent to violent will increase? Didn't see anyone acting violently. Saw people sitting with arms linked while they were sprayed, etc.That wasn't my question. Do you believe there is a chance the OWSers will become more violent in the future?In your years of ongoing relationships with local police officers, have you been on many ride-alongs? Ride-alongs? No. It never occurred to me. I would not have thought it proper for anyone to simply ride in the car with an officer while he was on duty.If you want to understand cops, ride with them, talk to them. You might find what they have to say interesting. Also, where you live, where you have those ongoing relationships with local police officers, what's the population? That's an important question for context.
The population of this city is =/-33,000.Thank you.

RussP
11-27-2011, 18:46
With respect, police are not combat soldiers. They are not at war. There is no reason for them to be armed and equipped like they routinely have to engage in urban combat. The need is overblown. Occasions will arise when more than pistols and shotguns are needed. But those occasions are not the norm. I cannot see any need for policemen to be equipped like combat soldiers for their normal routine everyday activities.It has been said that some people just do not know just how much they do not know. You are one of those people.

RussP
11-27-2011, 18:51
Pistols and shotguns would suffice for just about any situation that might be faced. The idea that a weapons race is necessary, etc. is farfetched and unsupported....coming from someone who cannot provide information to support his positions.

eaglefrq
11-27-2011, 20:35
With respect, police are not combat soldiers. They are not at war. There is no reason for them to be armed and equipped like they routinely have to engage in urban combat. The need is overblown. Occasions will arise when more than pistols and shotguns are needed. But those occasions are not the norm. I cannot see any need for policemen to be equipped like combat soldiers for their normal routine everyday activities.


This took about 2 min of searching on the web. It sure appears the police are in a war.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1887488,00.html

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=90009&page=1#.TtLyTfKwWNU

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2011/06/061011-ny-federally-licensed-gun-dealler-convicted.html

Operation Medusa to date has yielded the seizure of 296 firearms, the majority of which are military-style assault weapons such as the FN-FAL, AK-47 and AR-15 rifles

Bren
11-30-2011, 08:39
It has been said that some people just do not know just how much they do not know. You are one of those people.

That about sums him up - along with several others.

We see, repeatedly, in any GNG or Carry Issues thread that mentions police: "I don't know anything about what the police do, so they should base their training and tactics on what I think they do."

ChuteTheMall
11-30-2011, 08:47
We see, repeatedly, in any GNG or Carry Issues thread that mentions police: "I don't know anything about what the police do, so they should base their training and tactics on what I think they do."

True, but they still have to wear their hats.


:rofl:

Kadetklapp
11-30-2011, 09:00
While we are talking about disarming the police of their rifles as there is "no need" for them according to our closet liberal/sovereign citizen hybrid Brucev...

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8440468

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/crime/APX-AZTucsonPolice-Shooting_30181584-11052011

http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2008/jan/06/deputy_shoots_kills_man_armed_rifle26825/

http://www.cnycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=632577

If you pay attention, Bruce, you will notice in the above stories that these people weren't your typical thug gang bangers. These people were EDPs, Psychos, crazy-assed lunatics who the police are forced to deal with every day. I'm glad we aren't the neutered police force you so wish for.

I'M Glockamolie
11-30-2011, 09:34
While we are talking about disarming the police of their rifles as there is "no need" for them according to our closet liberal/sovereign citizen hybrid Brucev...

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8440468

If you pay attention, Bruce, you will notice in the above stories that these people weren't your typical thug gang bangers. These people were EDPs, Psychos, crazy-assed lunatics who the police are forced to deal with every day. I'm glad we aren't the neutered police force you so wish for.

I'll see your link of the guy shooting randomly in the park in Houston, and raise you a Mexican Cartel shooting, also in Houston. Tell me this isn't war.

http://www.chron.com/default/article/Zeta-soldiers-launched-Mexico-style-attack-in-2283370.php

Brucev
11-30-2011, 09:40
Re: police in "war..." etc. Nope. Just criminals doing what criminals do. The link to the mexicans is in a different class. Would consider it reasonable to send a SWAT team against such people. But routine carry/use of sub-machine guns/carbines/rifles by police... no. Talks about being at war on the streets is hyperbole. It is not reality.

msu_grad_121
11-30-2011, 09:51
Re: police in "war..." etc. Nope. Just criminals doing what criminals do. The link to the mexicans is in a different class. Would consider it reasonable to send a SWAT team against such people. But routine carry/use of sub-machine guns/carbines/rifles by police... no. Talks about being at war on the streets is hyperbole. It is not reality.

Sadly, Bruce, you can't make things like this go away just by shoving your fingers in your ears and saying "no." Honestly, your stubborn refusal to face facts is making me lose what little respect I had left for you. Unfortunately, there is no helping someone who won't be helped. I truly hope that one day you wake up and face reality.

I'M Glockamolie
11-30-2011, 10:09
Re: police in "war..." etc. Nope. Just criminals doing what criminals do. The link to the mexicans is in a different class. Would consider it reasonable to send a SWAT team against such people. But routine carry/use of sub-machine guns/carbines/rifles by police... no. Talks about being at war on the streets is hyperbole. It is not reality.

Yeah, SWAT would get there just in time to mop up the blood of the officers fighting back with handguns. I admit, I haven't read every post in the thread. Are you saying you don't want uniformed officers walking around with slung subguns, or that they shouldn't even have access to a rifle in their car? Although I've long since left LE, if you told me to go out there with a pistol and a couple of mags of ammo and do my best, I'd tell you to stick it, and fend for yourself with whatever you own.

All of your travels and worldly knowledge is akin to some college professors I had: They'd read about it, never done it, but have an opinion on how it's done that is more correct than those that had actually done it.

http://www.workingpoint.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/ostrich-head-in-sand-sign.gif

Kadetklapp
11-30-2011, 10:24
I wonder how the Norco shootout would have ended had McCarty not shown up with an AR-15......this being back in the day of EDC for uniformed police officers being S&W K15 revolvers and Ithica #37 'gauges.

That was in 1980, Bruce, and we still have departments who refuse to issue and train their officers in the use of patrol rifles (mine being one of them).

Pepper45
12-01-2011, 03:39
Re: police in "war..." etc. Nope. Just criminals doing what criminals do. The link to the mexicans is in a different class. Would consider it reasonable to send a SWAT team against such people. But routine carry/use of sub-machine guns/carbines/rifles by police... no. Talks about being at war on the streets is hyperbole. It is not reality.
You'd consider sending SWAT? That's nice of you. Not many cities have a full time SWAT team, most have a team that works patrol, detectives, etc. So if something bad happens, they have to drop their current assignment, get their gear together, and race to the scene. But for the sake of argument, let's say that city has a full time team, where they have a couple dozen guys that are ready to go, at a moment's notice. Great. Where are they? Sitting around drinking coffee and polishing their golf trophies? Let's hope so.

Let's go through a timeline, one that's probably VERY optimistic. They get the call of people being shot at. Patrol responds, to verify it, and see if they can deal with it. Patrol is on scene within a few minutes, and taking heavy fire. They put in a request for SWAT. This has to be approved by a sergeant, because for those guys to be committed to something requires a substantial investment of time and effort. That takes a minute. We're now at 5 minutes of someone shooting at people. Let's now say that the team is nearby, or at least really close. Let's say they're able to grab weapons, throw on heavy armor, and jump in their cool Peacekeeper or up-armored Suburban, and race to the scene. Very optimistically, that's another 15-20 minutes. So now patrol, armed only with handguns and shotguns, has been able to handle people actively shooting at other people, for 20-25 minutes. Is there any reasonable way that a street cop is going to even be able to hold a perimeter for long against people armed like that, if they don't have access to anything better than a shotgun?

Folks like you make me want to give you the gun and belt for a few days. You think you can do it better, get to it. I'll go sell insurance, or repair printers, you get your ass out there and give 'em service with a smile, and to heck with having all the tools. You get what other people, who have absolutely no concept of what your job entails, decide you need, or what looks least threatening or intimidating. But no, that won't happen. For as much as we'd like to believe you're an expert in what we need to do our jobs, you'd never walk a beat, or run towards the sound of the guns. Just sit in your corner, and keep prattling on about things you don't understand. But at least do yourself a favor, and admit to the world that you're basing your opinion on simple feelings that have no basis in the real world.

Misty02
12-01-2011, 05:05
Pepper45, we donít even have to put ourselves in the shoes of the responding officer(s), all we have to do is see it from our perspective. Our main goal is to avoid dangerous situations so we are never in a position where we have to use our firearm in the first place. Weíve all read news stories of criminal mobs indiscriminately harming others. News stories of robberies, more often than not, involving multiple armed individuals. I wonít even touch on gangs, drug deals gone bad and other more serious crimes involving career criminals. How often have some of us wondered, if we were unfortunate enough to find ourselves trapped in something like that, do we have enough fire power to make it out of there alive and in one piece? Our job is only to make it long enough to escape. That of an officer is to stay in the fight and remove the danger those individuals pose to others, escape to safety is not an option, someone has to remove those people (one way or another).

Heck, if I was required to stay in the fight and take those people in, I better be given impenetrable body armor that covers every inch of my body (from head to toe) and the firepower I need to complete the job you sent me in to do as quickly and as safely as possible. Give me anything else and Iíll tell you what you can do with that job.

.

Brucev
12-01-2011, 07:57
Sadly, Bruce, you can't make things like this go away just by shoving your fingers in your ears and saying "no." Honestly, your stubborn refusal to face facts is making me lose what little respect I had left for you. Unfortunately, there is no helping someone who won't be helped. I truly hope that one day you wake up and face reality.

I have spent some time reading through a number of links. I also had a chat with the local Chief of Police. The material from BATF and similar organizations is not credible. Much is not up-to-date, including some of the links in this thread. For my part I apologize for some of my comments. Regardless of comments that I found objectionable, I should not have responded so sharply. In spite of disagreements expressed in this thread, police are not the enemy of society any more than citizens. On the corner of my desk is a S&W 15, which once was a standard police pistol. In the range bag is a Beretta 92FS, which again was once well regarded. Now the S&W M&P .40 S&W is well-favored. The Win. M-12 was supplanted by the Rem. 870. So it goes. This move to carbines/rifles may simply be part of that transition.

fran m
12-01-2011, 17:44
Administrators realize that heavier weaponry is sometimes needed and are providing their officers what they MAY need. There has been no public outcry at any department near mine in SE PA that I am aware of.

Google Mumbai. Don't think that something similar can't or won't occur here in the U.S. Departments are preparing for the "what if's," as they should be.

I saw after I posted Bruce wrote about his progressive transition to different weapons. It is now necessary to have better weaponry Bruce. My Department has had ARs on the street since the late 90's. We did have an officer involved shooting involving suspects armed with long guns, AKs to be exact, that the suspect couldn't get to so they engaged with 9mm pistols hitting one officer, Police hit one suspect. AR's were not available then but would have made the outcome different. You are right that these weapons are not often needed on a normal ordinary day. They are for the extraordinary day. The day when there use by a determined officer may save the day.

fran m
12-01-2011, 17:47
As far as weapons the public is better off having officers armed with ARs, More accurate at longer distances, easier to fire, higher mag capacity and in my experience have more precise sights.

This thread has gone far away from Occupy Portland.

RussP
12-01-2011, 18:47
Re: police in "war..." etc. Nope. Just criminals doing what criminals do. The link to the mexicans is in a different class. Would consider it reasonable to send a SWAT team against such people. But routine carry/use of sub-machine guns/carbines/rifles by police... no. Talks about being at war on the streets is hyperbole. It is not reality.See, you don't know what you don't know.

I'd like to say more, but I'd have to ban myself.

RussP
12-01-2011, 19:02
I have spent some time reading through a number of links. I also had a chat with the local Chief of Police.What questions did you ask the local Chief of Police? What were his aswers? The material from BATF and similar organizations is not credible.Who told you the information is not credible?Much is not up-to-date, including some of the links in this thread.Are you talking about links to stories/articles of shootings going back to 2008? Why are they "not up-to-date"? For my part I apologize for some of my comments. Regardless of comments that I found objectionable, I should not have responded so sharply. In spite of disagreements expressed in this thread, police are not the enemy of society any more than citizens. On the corner of my desk is a S&W 15, which once was a standard police pistol. In the range bag is a Beretta 92FS, which again was once well regarded. Now the S&W M&P .40 S&W is well-favored. The Win. M-12 was supplanted by the Rem. 870. So it goes. This move to carbines/rifles may simply be part of that transition.If believing that makes you feel better, please accept that as the reason. HOWEVER, notwithstanding your last few sentences, the reason is to be prepared for bad guys armed with large caliber rifles and other heavy duty offensive weapons. That is why police are arming themselves with weapons proven successful in urban warfare.

Brucev
12-01-2011, 19:56
[QUOTE=RussP;18230829]What questions did you ask the local Chief of Police? What were his aswers? I had started some chili. I saw him while out jogging and invited him in at lunch. It was not planned. He thought some of the ideas expressed were "over the top." He said most departments in this area use pistols and shotguns.

Who told you the information is not credible? Given their checkered record as detailed in the American Rifleman and given their recent failure with Fast and Furious, anything the BATF says must be taken with a shovel of salt.

Are you talking about links to stories/articles of shootings going back to 2008? Why are they "not up-to-date?" Would think that if there were a widespread explosion of militarized criminals on the streets, there would be more up-to-date links. The older information is not irrelevant. But more recent information would be helpful.

If believing that makes you feel better, please accept that as the reason. HOWEVER, notwithstanding your last few sentences, the reason is to be prepared for bad guys armed with large caliber rifles and other heavy duty offensive weapons. That is why police are arming themselves with weapons proven successful in urban warfare. You are of course welcome to your opinion as is everyone else. It is understandable that any police department would want to have broad support among the general public. It is understandable that police would want to have the equipment they need to do their job. If a department needs these weapons, they will have to make their case to the general public and gain their support.

RussP
12-01-2011, 22:49
Incredulous...What questions did you ask the local Chief of Police? What were his aswers? I had started some chili. I saw him while out jogging and invited him in at lunch. It was not planned. He thought some of the ideas expressed were "over the top." He said most departments in this area use pistols and shotguns.Which ideas did he say were over the top? What area of Georgia are you talking about? You have a population of +/- 33,000. Are the surrounding jurisdictions the same size? How many sworn personnel are in the Chief's department?

Now, in doing some reading, it seems we have a little discrepancy about that population number. In this post you say...The population of this city is =/-33,000.But in this post you say something different...We are getting ready for a weekend celebration in our small town. For the next few days the population will balloon from +/- 1000 to a little over 4000.Now, you being a preacher and all, I know you wouldn't be intentionally misleading all us good people.I am the pastor of two rural churches that keep me busy with various Bible studies, visits to hospitals and nursing homes and visits to the homes of prospective members.This afternoon I was out making visits in the community. As I serve two rural church's, the community is a rather large area. I dropped by a church member's farm to pass the time a bit.Today while out visiting church members, I went by the farm of a church member who allows me to do some informal target shooting behind one of his work buildings.

As normal I put up a harrow blade painted white. Using the axle hole as a aiming mark and firing from 15 yds. (i.e., long steps), I had a nice time just trying to see how I could do.I'm going to take a guess and say that y'all don't have many problems with illegal drugs around where you are in Georgia.

Where we are, the county population is less than 30,000. 40% of that number live in my community. Both the County Sheriff Office and our community police force, all of them have rifles because of the rural settings. There are drug operations here and in adjacent counties.

So, y'all just don't have any of those problems, do you?Who told you the information is not credible? Given their checkered record as detailed in the American Rifleman and given their recent failure with Fast and Furious, anything the BATF says must be taken with a shovel of salt.That's not all bad, taking there claims with that grain of salt, but reports of verified events...that should be considered reliable.Are you talking about links to stories/articles of shootings going back to 2008? Why are they "not up-to-date?" Would think that if there were a widespread explosion of militarized criminals on the streets, there would be more up-to-date links. The older information is not irrelevant. But more recent information would be helpful.I happen to prefer not having a great quantity of recent events.
If believing that makes you feel better, please accept that as the reason. HOWEVER, notwithstanding your last few sentences, the reason is to be prepared for bad guys armed with large caliber rifles and other heavy duty offensive weapons. That is why police are arming themselves with weapons proven successful in urban warfare. You are of course welcome to your opinion as is everyone else. It is understandable that any police department would want to have broad support among the general public. It is understandable that police would want to have the equipment they need to do their job. If a department needs these weapons, they will have to make their case to the general public and gain their support.You mean you want the police to ask permission of the citizens to arm and prepare themselves to engage armed criminals? How about we just wait until a cop is killed, maybe 2 or 3 cops need to be killed to show the need. Would you agree with that?

I asked you earlier about taking a few ride-alongs with your local PD. I've decided that won't accomplish anything. You need to ride along with a department in a metropolitan area with a combined population of around a million people. Most all the departments in the Atlanta area would work, but you're too far south for that to work. How about Macon? You really need to talk to cops in cities and counties where crime, major crime, is a problem. You need to see what it is like going up against well armed people.

larry_minn
12-01-2011, 22:53
I guess I am getting confused. I seem to recall the origional topic.... Now......

BTW I still think a larger container of spray needs to be used.

RussP
12-02-2011, 08:28
I guess I am getting confused. I seem to recall the origional topic.... Now......

BTW I still think a larger container of spray needs to be used.Well yes, that was the original topic, and yes, in this citizen's opinion, the appropriate application of seasoning spray (hey, if pizza is a veggie...) is warranted when physical contact might be undesirable.

Patchman
12-02-2011, 09:15
During the September 2011 Carson City, Nev., IHOP shooting, the BG had a AK. A local storeowner (Swagler) observed the shooting, had a handgun in his possession, and had the tactical advantage (the BG was unaware of the storeowner's presence). He chose not to act and said:

"when somebody is pointing an automatic weapon at you -- you can't believe the firepower, the kind of rounds coming out of that weapon."

Read more: http://www.nbcactionnews.com/dpp/news/national/officials:-several-shot-at-nevada-ihop#ixzz1fOEvro1Z

I can't and don't blame Swagler.

The lesson is, anyone who intentionally puts LEOs lives in mortal danger by knowingly failing to provide them with proper equipment (when knowing real threats like this exists and has come to pass) is as guilty as the murderer who actually pulled the trigger.

Patchman
12-02-2011, 09:26
Here's another incident where the BG outgunned the responding LEOs.

It started as an armed robbery at the Super Stop on Moores Mill Road around 11:30 p.m. Monday. Investigators said the suspect, 23-year-old Joseph Scott Shriver of El Paso, Texas, fired a shot into the building then took off.

Madison County deputy Brent Beavers spotted the suspect's vehicle and attempted to stop him... The suspect fired off 12 to 15 rounds with an assault rifle and shot the deputy in the face.

About an hour after the first shooting, deputies and officers rushed to another shooting... where [another] police officer, Justin Raby, was shot by a suspect with a matching description.

Guess what the lesson here is also?

Patchman
12-02-2011, 09:32
Craziness like this go on and on, where the BGs have access to rifles while liberals and cop-haters do all they can to minimize LEO safety by voicing how LEOs with long guns are scary.

fran m
12-02-2011, 14:47
The reality is that Bruce can't change a thing. he is a minority among members of the public, the majority of which don't think about the police until they need them and trust their communities departments and elected officials to do the right thing for the public. After all the officers are working to protect them. A long gun has the potential to do a better job of protecting the public and the officers.

It really doesn't matter what Bruce thinks or spouts. Like Occupy-----. Not changing a thing.

fran m
12-02-2011, 14:52
There is a news clip around where a protestor admits to the group having conspired to surround the police and keep them from exiting the area. I haven't had a chance to look for it.

Cubdriver
12-02-2011, 15:02
There is a news clip around where a protestor admits to the group having conspired to surround the police and keep them from exiting the area. I haven't had a chance to look for it.

If you do, please let us know and post a link!

-Pat

Morris
12-02-2011, 15:24
The lesson is, anyone who intentionally puts LEOs lives in mortal danger by knowingly failing to provide them with proper equipment (when knowing real threats like this exists and has come to pass) is as guilty as the murderer who actually pulled the trigger.

Truth and amen.

RussP
12-02-2011, 15:36
There is a news clip around where a protestor admits to the group having conspired to surround the police and keep them from exiting the area. I haven't had a chance to look for it.Are you talking about Portland or UC Davis?

Morris
12-02-2011, 15:49
Yes, there is a video of where UC Davis senior officer talks to the line-up and warns them they would be sprayed. In short, they said to bring it on.

RussP
12-02-2011, 18:34
Yes, there is a video of where UC Davis senior officer talks to the line-up and warns them they would be sprayed. In short, they said to bring it on.:cool: UC Davis Occupy Protester Admits Police Were Provoked In Pepper Spray Incid (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1384007)

fran m
12-02-2011, 20:20
Thanks Russ. I was at work and didn't have time to look it up. Another guy had it up on his computer but I couldn't watch the clip.

fuzzyduck
12-03-2011, 02:37
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDd_TYotrxw

HERE IT IS!!! Another point of view.

msu_grad_121
12-03-2011, 06:07
You mean there's a video out there showing how the police were blocked and threatened, and completely justifying their meager use of force to even the most staunch police-hater? Get right outta town! Who would've seen THAT coming?! :upeyes:

Bonus points for the kid that decided to take a haymaker swing at the cop as he was getting arrested. How did you think that was going to turn out, idjit?

Now, can we get retractions from those posters on this thread who were crying foul at the pepper spraying of "poor, innocent, peaceful protesters who didn't do anything to deserve what those big, mean, bully officers did to them?" Wait, that would require those posters to be adults and admit they were wrong. I'll just hold my breath on that one...

Misty02
12-03-2011, 07:43
You mean there's a video out there showing how the police were blocked and threatened, and completely justifying their meager use of force to even the most staunch police-hater? Get right outta town! Who would've seen THAT coming?! :upeyes:

Bonus points for the kid that decided to take a haymaker swing at the cop as he was getting arrested. How did you think that was going to turn out, idjit?

Now, can we get retractions from those posters on this thread who were crying foul at the pepper spraying of "poor, innocent, peaceful protesters who didn't do anything to deserve what those big, mean, bully officers did to them?" Wait, that would require those posters to be adults and admit they were wrong. I'll just hold my breath on that one...

Based on this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDd_TYotrxw) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDd_TYotrxw))my only question would be: Why did they wait so long to react and allow it to get so out of control?

.

RussP
12-03-2011, 08:55
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDd_TYotrxw

HERE IT IS!!! Another point of view.Yeah, that totality of circumstances thing sucks big time, doesn't it. :rofl:

RussP
12-03-2011, 09:30
Based on this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDd_TYotrxw) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDd_TYotrxw))my only question would be: Why did they wait so long to react and allow it to get so out of control?

.Don't know, wasn't there, but...You have to believe they were giving the occupiers/protesters/PITAs plenty of opportunity to comply and move out of the area.

Now, what does everyone think would have happened if the UCD Police had released the arrestees as demanded by the crowd?

RussP
12-03-2011, 22:21
Well, it appears the good Reverend Brucev has left the building. Too bad, I was looking forward to learning more about the Chief's comments and more info on the size of the departments in his area who have no need for cops on the street carrying more than a pistol and maybe a shotgun.

Misty02
12-04-2011, 08:37
Don't know, wasn't there, but...You have to believe they were giving the occupiers/protesters/PITAs plenty of opportunity to comply and move out of the area.

Now, what does everyone think would have happened if the UCD Police had released the arrestees as demanded by the crowd?

It should be difficult for anyone to continue to insist that it wasnít justified.

.

Cubdriver
12-04-2011, 09:48
It should be difficult for anyone to continue to insist that it wasnít justified.

.

Anyone who's got any sense and is grounded in reality, anyway.

Those who are rabidly against the use of force by the police alas typically don't fall into this group, so they'll continue to argue that it was wrong. :upeyes:

-Pat

Misty02
12-04-2011, 10:05
Anyone who's got any sense and is grounded in reality, anyway.

Those who are rabidly against the use of force by the police alas typically don't fall into this group, so they'll continue to argue that it was wrong. :upeyes:

-Pat

Can there be people around that are really that dense, in spite all the evidence? That is just plain scary!

I guess, if they exist, they would not carry any means of self-defense as there would be no way (in their mind) that any threat of another would justify force (in some cases, even lethal). It goes both ways, if officers canít defend themselves, then neither can we. We even have the ability to avoid and escape, they donít, they have the duty to apprehend.

.