Militarization of the police in the United States

[erik]

Do they need so many guns.... the guys in black have double stacked mags going into an assumedly residential area....

All I see are 2 AR-15s and issued sidearms. Anyone can own double stacks, why not police? Hell, you can get drums and 60 round mags.

Is there a role for rifles- yes. I don't think anyone is against the police having rifles if needed, of body armor or robots or what not... but double stacked mags indicate a mindset that is dangerous. The number of suspects in particular innocents who die via bleeding out is also a problem. deadmen tell no tales....

I don't see a problem with double stack mags when anyone can own them. However, I'm not sure which Department SWAT team that is, but not every SWAT team has AR's, double stacks, etc. etc. Every SWAT team is different and has their own equipment.

so he didn't really want to kill cops, he wanted to be killed by them.....

Well, yeah he did. He was yelling on the porch that he was killing any police that approach him. As the officer got behind a thick tree and got a line of sight on him, he announced he is a police officer and said to drop the weapon. He didn't drop the weapon (I believe is was a 30.06 rifle) and raised his rifle towards the officer. He was gonna go down shooting if he could.

video- bahahaha....

:D

[zraver]

Z - firstly you have to define what you mean by "excessive" and then you have to outline examples of situations where it might apply or this particular discussion will go nowhere. I keep pointing out that any use of force now matter how slight can be regarded as "excessive" from different perspectives. Merely touching someone on the shoulder (say move them away from the vicinity of a an accident is technically battery if the person touched does not give at least tacit consent. As a result an "excessive use of force" complaint could be lodged against the officer concerned and not just by the person touched, the complaint can come from anyone who witnessed the incident.

An action not necessary to the performance of duties that would get a citizen arrested.

Furthermore when it comes to the arrest process itself it is bordering on impossible not to inflict some minor degree of injury even when the person involved is basically compliant. If you'd ever been handcuffed (other than for fun of course - real cuffs don't have fur linings :)) you would know that it is very hard to get them on someone without inflicting at least some minor injury. Add even the slightest degree of resistance which incidentally doesn't have to be aggression, just fear/nervousness/intoxication etc and you will often inflict small cuts, abrasions or localized swelling on the person being cuffed. Add any degree of proper physical resistance and it becomes extremely difficult to cuff someone with out injuring them at least slightly. When full resistance is used it is impossible to cuff someone without assistance by yourself unless you use a force option to incapacitate the POI. I know because we practice on each other during training and even at 50% effort it its dam near impossible to cuff someone without assistance and we end up injured when we role play as the suspect.

I don't think anyone is complaining about the cuffing process, but about the boot stomps delivered for contempt of cop afterward. There is a huge difference between actions driven by nessecuity and those that are not. I can legally break your ribs when performing CPR, no crime. I break your ribs otherwise and its assault. Ditto for this discussion.

So force is force and it ranges from simple physical contact through to a bullet and people can and will complain about any degree of force employed by LEO's even if were the simply bystanders and not victims of the incident. I am not suggesting any of the above means I'm advocating some kind of blanket proscription against UOF complaints nor am I suggesting officers are never guilty of using excessive force. What I am saying is that unless you have either :

a) a clear and persistent pattern of minor UOF complaints against one particular officer; or
b) evidence of some kind of significant physical injury (e.g something requiring at least a check-up by an medical professional)

Then firing a LEO for inflicting any kind of injury under any circumstances where someone complains will mean that eventually you would loose all your officers - unless they never choose to arrest anyone.

If the injury would get a citizen charged, a cop should be as well.

I'm not excusing anything. I have in the past and will again (if required to) investigated matters where the final recommendation has been that the officer concerned be fired/dismissed. And there a host of matters they can go down for - not just for excessive use of force complaints, officers can be and are fired for failing to follow procedure, dishonesty/theft ,giving false evidence (including lying to me or a colleague while under investigation) and drug related matters. If there is enough evidence to warrant criminal charges then they get the "double dip" (i.e. lose their jobs and get a criminal conviction). I'm not excusing anything what I want is a good clear example of the type of force involved and the circumstances in which it was applied before I potentially ruin someones career and reputation. You on the other hand seem to be demanding perfection when it comes to professional standards in PD's and are setting the bar so high no-one could be expected to meet them for very long unless they just stayed in the office. I would at the very least think you would be consistent and demand the same high standards from every other trade/profession and person you might meet in your local community - and from yourself.

No cop should be fired without also being charged... You listed crimes as reasons for firing and they should be prosecuted.

Wouldn't even begin to cover the cost, tactical ops share of any modern PD's total HR and capital budgets is tiny. Keeping one cop on the road can cost 100K or more a year . I could outfit him and give him time of to train for a fraction of that,especially since only a small % of PD need to be trained up to SWAT level (and there are different levels of tac ops training which would make it even cheaper depending on the type/level of ops you are training them for.)

Adding a clerk to handle the paper work side of the citizens committee plus ancillary costs would be what 50k a year?Sorry but for almost every county in the US that is doable. If its not move it up to the state level. The idea is to create an organization with real teeth to watch the watchers.

By "beat down" I assume you mean inflicted serious injuries upon? I would expect the PD he worked for to be professional - "oops" wouldn't cut it give a valid reason that can be corroborated or face the consequences. If you dropped the ball while in the army and someone got injured would you expect to get away with "oops"? well neither do most PD's I know of.

I don't think you are in the US so you may not know about Brady Violations. When the state denies a citizen their right to present evidence in their own defense through loss, malfeasance or mistake its a Brady violation and may be grounds for a directed acquittal. But only if the defendant can prove the prosecution has, or should have it (which had been extended to stuff they should have gotten from police). In this case an oops could let some very bad people go. Always on is superior.

Well under your rules you wouldn't get it.

Not my rules, American jurisprudence

If I show up on your property to even if it's only canvassing the neighborhood for information about a crime in the local area and you have no info - you and yours are going to be recorded.

I don't have to open the door unless I consent to talk to you. If your recording uncovered something illegal, then as long as your entry on to my property was otherwise legal, I'd have no expectation of privacy either. If the entry wasn't legal, then the discovery of the crime would be fruit of the poisonous tree.

If you take your family to the beach - your kids are going to get videoed as well unless you start marking out special "exemption zones" and then watch how quickly they multiply. Your way is to messy, complicated and to intrusive. I'll turn my camera on when and where I need it for evidence and I am not going to be some kind of walking surveillance post monitoring my neighbors and fellow community members.

In America there is no expectation of privacy in public except in a few very well defined areas like public rest rooms, phone booths etc.

No they've got taps - so I can dance around the truth when I'm in court

OOhh,, combined with hiding behind the badge..... Bet that is impressive :P

[zraver]

All Anyone can own double stacks, why not police?

what does creating taped double stacks imply about motivation and training?

That is a move for someone who is expecting to lay down covering fire..... We can see 120 rounds in the photo that are possibly headed down range in a residential area. Sorry, covering fire is not a valid police tactic for serving a warrant.

[Doktor]

In America there is no expectation of privacy in public except in a few very well defined areas like public rest rooms, phone booths etc

Really?!

How it worked out for satellite images and people being pictured on the streets or in the yards facing street? You can also ask for your property to be "blackened". I remind you, we talk about stuff that can be normally seen from the street.

[zraver]

Really?!

Yes really

How it worked out for satellite images and people being pictured on the streets or in the yards facing street? You can also ask for your property to be "blackened". I remind you, we talk about stuff that can be normally seen from the street.

If it can be normally seen from the street and I don't like that, its up to me to put up a fence high enough protect my privacy. In America rights are generally passive in that the it is the citizens duty to exercise them. The presumption is knowledge and knowing waiver or exercising of said rights.

[Doktor]

You sure you can build a wall 6' high anywhere in USA?

[Monash]

Re the "Occupy incident" in the video. You have a trespass or a public nuisance matter, if the people involved "move on" by themselves when directed to do so - no problem. If however they won't just how do you expect one fully grown adult to physically move another without using some kind of force?

Grab and drag - you risk inflicting pain and injury. Joint locks and blows ditto. Battons? OC hurts like hell but at least it inflicts no physical damage. And over here we were expected to take a good "dose" of OC in training before we were qualified to carry it so we know from personal experience how it works. So sans moving someone with our vaunted psychic powers, how would you do it?

On this occasion the LEO in the video should have got the OK from the OIC at the scene before using the fogger. (Myself? I would have though a standard, personal issue OC canister would have sufficed and would've carried less risk of splash back on innocent bystanders/Police) so maybe he should have been dismissed. (Don't know - don't have all the facts. )

In any event I'm talking about crowd control in general no this particular incident. Parents have enough trouble getting their kids to go somewhere they don't want to go let alone trying to make an adult (who is behaving like a child ) move against their will. :)

[zraver]

You sure you can build a wall 6' high anywhere in USA?

If its my land, yes I can build a fence as high as I need to, its called a curtilidge and that is where the right to privacy begins.

Monash

On this occasion the LEO in the video should have got the OK from the OIC at the scene before using the fogger. (Myself? I would have though a standard, personal issue OC canister would have sufficed and would've carried less risk of splash back on innocent bystanders/Police) so maybe he should have been dismissed. (Don't know - don't have all the facts. )

After review he was fired.... He should have been charged. He sprayed some of those people 3x in just a few seconds.

Occupy Maced: Police pepper spray unarmed youth, tear tents down - YouTube

[Monash]

An action not necessary to the performance of duties that would get a citizen arrested.

I've only ever been talking about actions taken pursuant to a LEOs duties i.e during an arrest. Not acts extraneous to same.

I don't think anyone is complaining about the cuffing process, but about the boot stomps delivered for contempt of cop afterward. There is a huge difference between actions driven by nessecuity and those that are not. I can legally break your ribs when performing CPR, no crime. I break your ribs otherwise and its assault. Ditto for this discussion.

FYI -most public complaints re: use of force are about lower level issues like cuffing. This is because low level use of force incidents are far and away more common that higher level ones and neither I or any of my colleagues would have truck with kicking or beating a suspect because they gave us lip. You see it you report it.

If the injury would get a citizen charged, a cop should be as well.

If we are talking about the above then depending on all the circumstances no prob.

No cop should be fired without also being charged... You listed crimes as reasons for firing and they should be prosecuted.

You failed to note my point - before you charge someone, anyone with a criminal offense you have to be confident there is sufficient evidence to support a conviction. Failing a drug test will not get you convicted of drug possession because not all of the proofs required for even a low level drug charge will be present - but it is enough for dismissal due to loss of confidence. Continued failures to follow procedures (like how to handle evidence) isn't a criminal offence but shows you have poor regard for your job so it can get you dismissed. Same can be said about things like sexual harassment complaints etc. Also you can have an officer who might get charged with an criminal offence e.g a domestic violence matter etc and get off the charge in court. They can still be fired because the job believes the conduct involved showed extremely poor judgement/decision making or set a bad public example. Likewise any criminal conviction for example a drink driving can get a LEO fired even if the matter occurred while he is off duty and has nothing to do with how he does his job. The profession has high expectations as to how you present yourself in public at all times. Live up to them or get out.

Adding a clerk to handle the paper work side of the citizens committee plus ancillary costs would be what 50k a year?Sorry but for almost every county in the US that is doable. If its not move it up to the state level. The idea is to create an organization with real teeth to watch the watchers.

No disciplinary proceeding is ever that straightforward, the panel members and witnesses would have costs associated with attending, members would need to be vetted (unless of course it's OK for local gang members to sit on the committee.) Offices need to be maintained etc etc etc. Plus there would be an appeal process - you can't deny anyone in the US access to the court system proper if they believe they have been legally wronged so if an officer does appear before your "panel" and if they are found to be guilty (for want of a better term) and if they are fired then they will have the option of seeking legal advice and suing for wrongful dismissal. So your panel would need legal advice plus insurance available while sitting (ain't no way in hell any panel member would accept personal liability for a decision he makes which then gets overturned on appeal). Plus the officer would probably want legal advice at the hearing and will expect to be reimbursed if he gets off.

In other words lawyer$, lawyer$ lawyer$.

OOhh,, combined with hiding behind the badge..... Bet that is impressive :P

My badge is only tiny - what is there to hide behind, that would be silly .

[Monash]

Before someone talks about that stats above just being the "bad apples" that you find in any bunch, these may be the bad (or rotten) apples, but they have been protected by "the thin blue line" for so long that the whole bunch is bad. I'm more angry at those who enable this type of action by looking the other way, helping out a brother or outright lying than I am at those who do these actions.

I really don't think I'm jaded when I say that I believe that 5% of cops give the rest a good name.

I believe there are something like 800,000 full time law enforcement officers in the US working for all levels of government. This figure obviously doesn't include and part time or volunteer LEO'S. Why then is anyone surprised when a small % turn out to be incompetent or corrupt? The surprise would be if there weren't any "bad" cops, after all why should law enforcement be different from any other profession on the planet. All you can do is get rid of the bad ones as they show up and keep working on your selection, training and anti-corruption processes.

[Doktor]

If its my land, yes I can build a fence as high as I need to, its called a curtilidge and that is where the right to privacy begins.

It might be your land, but it is still subject to local gov. Permits, licenses etc are needed for you to take that fence, right?

If I am your neighbour and I build a 10 story building, would you build a fence the same height?

[zraver]

It might be your land, but it is still subject to local gov. Permits, licenses etc are needed for you to take that fence, right?

If I am your neighbour and I build a 10 story building, would you build a fence the same height?

Yes, you have to pay the man in some states, in others you don't. However I don't think you're going to build a 10 story building next to a single family dwelling unless its high occupancy apartments. If I wanted to protect my privacy in that case i would need to put up out buildings or awnings.

[zraver]

FYI -most public complaints re: use of force are about lower level issues like cuffing. This is because low level use of force incidents are far and away more common that higher level ones and neither I or any of my colleagues would have truck with kicking or beating a suspect because they gave us lip. You see it you report it.




If we are talking about the above then depending on all the circumstances no prob.

That is what I am talking about.... its far too common in the US. The prosecutions for it far too few and too light.... One officer had 6 fatal shootings before he popped a 7th unarmed victim... others have cost their cities millions in settlements

You failed to note my point - before you charge someone, anyone with a criminal offense you have to be confident there is sufficient evidence to support a conviction. Failing a drug test will not get you convicted of drug possession because not all of the proofs required for even a low level drug charge will be present - but it is enough for dismissal due to loss of confidence. Continued failures to follow procedures (like how to handle evidence) isn't a criminal offence but shows you have poor regard for your job so it can get you dismissed. Same can be said about things like sexual harassment complaints etc. Also you can have an officer who might get charged with an criminal offence e.g a domestic violence matter etc and get off the charge in court. They can still be fired because the job believes the conduct involved showed extremely poor judgement/decision making or set a bad public example. Likewise any criminal conviction for example a drink driving can get a LEO fired even if the matter occurred while he is off duty and has nothing to do with how he does his job. The profession has high expectations as to how you present yourself in public at all times. Live up to them or get out.

perjury and falsifying evidence is a criminal act... but I concede I was over broad on that statement.

No disciplinary proceeding is ever that straightforward, the panel members and witnesses would have costs associated with attending, members would need to be vetted (unless of course it's OK for local gang members to sit on the committee.) Offices need to be maintained etc etc etc. Plus there would be an appeal process - you can't deny anyone in the US access to the court system proper if they believe they have been legally wronged so if an officer does appear before your "panel" and if they are found to be guilty (for want of a better term) and if they are fired then they will have the option of seeking legal advice and suing for wrongful dismissal. So your panel would need legal advice plus insurance available while sitting (ain't no way in hell any panel member would accept personal liability for a decision he makes which then gets overturned on appeal). Plus the officer would probably want legal advice at the hearing and will expect to be reimbursed if he gets off.

No lawyers, employment termination proceedings are not courts

My badge is only tiny - what is there to hide behind, that would be silly .

nice tap dancing routine there....

[cyppok]

The students that were pepper sprayed were on their campus, hence they were not trespassing but the cops were.
The cop is in a youtube video coming to them and spraying them in the face for fun, imagine if it was your kid there sitting peacefully (they can't be trespassing if its public grounds in broad daylights no matter what you imagine)...

All of this gets down to the following.
When the cops 'bend' the law in their favor and compliance shifts expect the following to happen.
1) people will know where you live, your name, etc... thanks to the internet and the destruction of privacy.

2) compliance ceases, which means people will look at you as a problem not a solution, ergo some witnesses in your favor will choose not to be, and others that aren't in your favor will present evidence against you

3) a culture of disdain slowly creeps up until no matter how good you present yourself or are ideologically painted on tv it no longer matters and all cops are branded public scumbags by the public at large...

4) Right now I'm going to give you some food for thought but this is the most major change you will encounter in the future (before energy weapons)...
Notice Detroit going bankrupt and San Bernardino etc...
Personal Liability for officers once the cities are shown to be insolvent is going to be a very real whipsaw effect. Not only will you get no money to defend yourself from an insolvent city but the public opinion (no matter how you think the newspapers paint it in your favor) on the ground will be against you. Imagine people suing a cop and winning the lawsuit while the department may indemnify you, if they are broke and cannot pay welcome to personal liability... (Ergo responsibility for transgressions)

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn-teen-sues-nypd-officer-false-arrest-article-1.1410423?localLinksEnabled=false
Food for thought...

A college-bound Brooklyn teen says a vengeful cop handcuffed him and dragged him off to jail for leaving his bicycle on the sidewalk — eight days after he slapped the officer with a lawsuit alleging false arrest.

Callahan’s lawyer, Joel Berger, was livid. “Never in 45 years of practicing civil rights law have I encountered such a brazen retaliation against a plaintiff by the very officer he has just sued,” Berger said.

(The first arrest was because someone they talked to had a gun, so bear in mind this guy arrested 3 people because 2 of them talked to 1 person) (second time it was obvious he was getting back at him for the suit since he arrested him in the cash checking place for parking bike on sidewalk)

[bonehead]

what does creating taped double stacks imply about motivation and training?

That is a move for someone who is expecting to lay down covering fire..... We can see 120 rounds in the photo that are possibly headed down range in a residential area. Sorry, covering fire is not a valid police tactic for serving a warrant.

Just curious here. Have you been trained in SWAT/police tactics or are you simply pulling this out of your ass because you see large capacity magazines and you are jumping to a conclusion.