If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WSBTV)   Remember that botched raid where the SWAT team threw a flashbang grenade into a toddler's crib? The county refuses to pay the toddler's medical bills   (wsbtv.com) divider line 208
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

12061 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Aug 2014 at 1:59 AM (3 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



208 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-18 11:24:04 PM
start throwing them in jail for contempt. that'll get their attention quickly.
 
2014-08-18 11:35:10 PM
I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.
 
2014-08-18 11:35:57 PM
No rules, no accountability

/any wonder the police are becoming more hated by the day?
 
2014-08-19 12:00:44 AM
To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"
 
2014-08-19 12:19:07 AM

netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"


No, they're saying:

The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses. After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so.

They didn't say "Please sue us!" or "We'd love to pay but we can't by law." or any other adult thing. They took the dickhead route and gave a blanket denial with no subtext through a lawyer. Line them up on the chopping block next to the Fergusun PD.
 
2014-08-19 12:20:30 AM

doglover: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

No, they're saying:

The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses. After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so.

They didn't say "Please sue us!" or "We'd love to pay but we can't by law." or any other adult thing. They took the dickhead route and gave a blanket denial with no subtext through a lawyer. Line them up on the chopping block next to the Fergusun PD.


Funny how two people can read the same thing and come to wildly different conclusions.
 
2014-08-19 12:50:04 AM

netweavr: doglover: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

No, they're saying:

The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses. After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so.

They didn't say "Please sue us!" or "We'd love to pay but we can't by law." or any other adult thing. They took the dickhead route and gave a blanket denial with no subtext through a lawyer. Line them up on the chopping block next to the Fergusun PD.

Funny how two people can read the same thing and come to wildly different conclusions.


Which is because the county lawyer is an asshole who can't communicate. If he COULD communicate, he would be saying what you are saying in the words you are using. YOU should be the country lawyer, or at least his mouthpiece.

Instead, he said something awful which makes decent people want to pop him in the mouth.
 
2014-08-19 12:50:08 AM
That toddler was clearly caught committing SWB.  He had it coming.
 
2014-08-19 01:53:17 AM

doglover: the country lawyer


Also, a rural juror.
img.fark.net
 
2014-08-19 02:04:09 AM
Color me bad, I mean shocked,
 
2014-08-19 02:05:45 AM
As a father, this story makes me feel stabby.  I have to keep reminding myself that the 95% of cops that are horrible people give the rest of them a bad name.
 
2014-08-19 02:07:37 AM

netweavr: They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"


No, they are saying, "sue us so we can laugh at you and have our judge throw it out, or just drag this out for years until you give up"

/if it looks like they may lose, a kilo of meth might be found at the plaintiffs house, or the parents may just accidentally fall down an elevator shaft onto a pile of bullets.
 
2014-08-19 02:08:15 AM

TheWhoppah: As a father, this story makes me feel stabby.  I have to keep reminding myself that the 95% of cops that are horrible people give the rest of them a bad name.


This one is more about the lawyers.
 
2014-08-19 02:10:12 AM
How hard is for them to just sit on the house or follow the residents around to make sure that no kids stay in the house
/Seems like the police are getting stupider by the minute
 
2014-08-19 02:11:03 AM
Good, I can't stand that little white trash honey boo boo.
 
2014-08-19 02:14:59 AM
So when are all the police defenders from the Brown riots going to come in here and call the kid a thug.
 
2014-08-19 02:16:51 AM
non-story. illegal assault baby
 
2014-08-19 02:17:15 AM
Still waiting for the proud Cliven Bundy Players to start showing up to protests in solidarity against authoritarian over-reach...

... why is it, you think, that they aren't showing up?
 
2014-08-19 02:19:38 AM
Sorry, subby, you're going to have to be way more specific.
 
2014-08-19 02:20:15 AM

netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"


Exactly.  No one is saying that the county isn't liable for this mistake by their officers, they are saying that at this point they are prohibited from paying.  That's not to say they are not acknowledging the potential liability.  Can you imagine the corruption that may occur in some places (well more so than we already see) if they could award cash based upon incidents that haven't been litigated and had at least a judge sign off on them.  I wonder why this case hasn't been quietly settled already other than if the number the family is giving the county is some outrageous figure (not that it wouldn't be justified to start extremely high number given the asinine conduct by the officers)
 
2014-08-19 02:21:28 AM
Bounkham Phonesavah, affectionately known as "Baby Boo Boo,"

non story. kid was obviously an anchor baby, and we all know that brown foreigners love to use their children as human shields.
 
2014-08-19 02:21:48 AM

jmr61: TheWhoppah: As a father, this story makes me feel stabby.  I have to keep reminding myself that the 95% of cops that are horrible people give the rest of them a bad name.

This one is more about the lawyers.


No, the lawyers are just emotionless pragmatons.  The officer that tossed a stun grenade into a baby's crib needs to be crucified... and I don't mean figuratively.
 
2014-08-19 02:23:24 AM
Simple fix:

Take each council member and restrain them in a lying position. Then, place a flash bang a few inches from either ear and pull the pin. Do it for each and then given them a few weeks to recuperate. Repeat the procedure indefinitely until they agree to pay.
 
2014-08-19 02:23:54 AM

drjekel_mrhyde: How hard is for them to just sit on the house or follow the residents around to make sure that no kids stay in the house
/Seems like the police are getting stupider by the minute


If I remember the story right from the initial outrage, the child was visiting and the crib was right next to the door.
 
2014-08-19 02:25:29 AM

doglover: netweavr: doglover: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

No, they're saying:

The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses. After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so.

They didn't say "Please sue us!" or "We'd love to pay but we can't by law." or any other adult thing. They took the dickhead route and gave a blanket denial with no subtext through a lawyer. Line them up on the chopping block next to the Fergusun PD.

Funny how two people can read the same thing and come to wildly different conclusions.

Which is because the county lawyer is an asshole who can't communicate. If he COULD communicate, he would be saying what you are saying in the words you are using. YOU should be the country lawyer, or at least his mouthpiece.

Instead, he said something awful which makes decent people want to pop him in the mouth.


That is not something he is allowed to do, if you hire a lawyer he can't say anything intentionally detrimental like "yeah he's guilty as sin, so sue him"

pretty sure you get disbarred for shiat like that
 
2014-08-19 02:30:36 AM
If you can get disbarred for telling the truth, then the law profession has come full circle to nothing, and we can toss the whole thing in the ocean.
 
2014-08-19 02:32:17 AM

martissimo: doglover: netweavr: doglover: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

No, they're saying:

The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses. After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so.

They didn't say "Please sue us!" or "We'd love to pay but we can't by law." or any other adult thing. They took the dickhead route and gave a blanket denial with no subtext through a lawyer. Line them up on the chopping block next to the Fergusun PD.

Funny how two people can read the same thing and come to wildly different conclusions.

Which is because the county lawyer is an asshole who can't communicate. If he COULD communicate, he would be saying what you are saying in the words you are using. YOU should be the country lawyer, or at least his mouthpiece.

Instead, he said something awful which makes decent people want to pop him in the mouth.

That is not something he is allowed to do, if you hire a lawyer he can't say anything intentionally detrimental like "yeah he's guilty as sin, so sue him"

pretty sure you get disbarred for shiat like that


Agreed.  His duty is to the taxpayers of the county.  He has to act in the best interest of the county which means defending their action in what ever manner he can.  Like a defense attorney, this can be incredibly difficult and look horrible, but he is required to do so regardless of his personal feelings.  This means while he cannot say they are guilty and will put up a defense no matter how weak, at the same time you can bet he will strongly encourage a healthy settlement ASAP as you do not want this case proceeding to a jury and being in the media any longer than necessary. Just because they didn't give the family a giant suitcase full of money the next day, doesn't mean it won't be coming their way at some point. It just has to go through some steps first.
 
2014-08-19 02:34:58 AM
The "Officer Safety" and "Overwhelming Force" policies of police departments executing drug war laws are a recipe for unintended casualties.  The officer laughs and smiles about being taken "off guard" because his mind is racing trying to make sure he doesn't say anything that will make him or his men look at fault and he wasn't prepped how to talk about that part of the event.

First their house burned down, then they had to move in with their meth-dealing relative, then the police throw a grenade in their child's play pin and half burn it's face off.  On the bright side I don't feel so bad about my life now.
 
2014-08-19 02:35:09 AM

Warlordtrooper: So when are all the police defenders from the Brown riots going to come in here and call the kid a thug.


To be fair the Brown kid was a thug. Didn't deserve to die but a flash bang to the face would have been ok with me in his case.
 
2014-08-19 02:39:17 AM
Maybe we should get our local and state leaders to craft a bill that limits the ability of police to use these bullshiat SWAT tactics for everyday warrants and police work.

Let SWAT go back to when they were used for hostage rescue  and other unusual situations.
 
2014-08-19 02:41:31 AM

spiritplumber: If you can get disbarred for telling the truth, then the law profession has come full circle to nothing, and we can toss the whole thing in the ocean.


You can get disbarred for saying something publicly that you don't have to say that is contrary to your client's interests.

If you're an attorney, there are things that you must leave unsaid in public no matter how much you would like to say them.  You can say them to your client in private all you want.

But encouraging a lawsuit against your client is pretty much inherently against your client's interests.  And if the law prohibits the payout without a legal settlement or judgment, you have to advise your client that they cannot pay without one.

It's the nature of an adversarial legal system.

/sausage being made.
 
2014-08-19 02:42:41 AM

drjekel_mrhyde: How hard is for them to just sit on the house or follow the residents around to make sure that no kids stay in the house
/Seems like the police are getting stupider by the minute


The front yard was littered with children's toys...
 
2014-08-19 02:43:30 AM

Duke_leto_Atredes: syrynxx: That toddler was clearly caught committing SWB.  He had it coming.

The baby was put in harms way by the scumbag parents. The war on drugs is lost. We might as well just kill the druggies all of them and nuke the places that grow the drugs


But the spice must flow!
 
2014-08-19 02:49:31 AM

HideAndGoFarkYourself: drjekel_mrhyde: How hard is for them to just sit on the house or follow the residents around to make sure that no kids stay in the house
/Seems like the police are getting stupider by the minute

If I remember the story right from the initial outrage, the child was visiting and the crib was right next to the door.


Well you're remembering the story part right, they had done no direct investigation of the house, they sent a CI in to buy meth from someone who wasn't even there at the time of the raid.  The CI reported he made the buy and the guy had a gun.  It's a southern thing to completely trust a junkie, not follow up on his word, and then use military armaments and two dozen guys who had high school GPA's too low for college, an extra $2K - $2500 and 8 weeks to spare to kick in the door for the government.

In Ga they bomb babies over a meth dealer who's not there.

in Fl they shoot a dude over about $2 of weed.

Tough call, baby bombers or .5g killers.

I think Fl wins the thug cop award, the kid lived can't say the same for the guy in Tampa.


Between everything Alex Jones is starting to make sense and that's REALLY frightening.
 
2014-08-19 02:49:53 AM
Oh c'mon. What normal person wants to pay money when they accidentally harm a toddler? Nobody would step up for that!
 
2014-08-19 02:52:42 AM

charlesmartel11235: non-story. illegal assault baby


He had one of those high-capacity pampers, too...
 
2014-08-19 02:56:47 AM
drayno76:

Between everything Alex Jones is starting to make sense and that's REALLY frightening.

I know, right?  I'm pretty sure now that the U.S. government probably IS covering up the existence of a Nazi base on the moon.
 
2014-08-19 02:57:29 AM
The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!
 
2014-08-19 03:05:30 AM

Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!


Cause that's totally what happened.
 
2014-08-19 03:06:23 AM
The city isn't going to pay because it is immune from tort liability because the state almost certainly has granted itself statutory or common-law sovereign immunity, and the cops are immune because of official immunity.

The victims will sue, and even though they can prove injury and damages, the state will invoke immunity and the courts will agree to throw the case out on that basis.

So the very government which guarantees you equal protection, due process, a right to trial, and remedy for injury will deny you all of that when it is the wrongdoer.

And the perverse outcome of both immunity doctrines is to encourage state actors to perform their duties negligently and recklessly because what the fark are you going to do? Sue them so they can compound your injury by shoving your case right back up your ass?

Sovereign immunity and official immunity are despotism flatly incompatible with the Constitution and any notion of justice, and both bullshiat doctrines belong in history's dustbin.
 
2014-08-19 03:08:35 AM

CRtwenty: Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!

Cause that's totally what happened.


Yeah, you're right. They were having a bible study, and the cops busted in, blew up a baby, and sprinkled meth all over the place.

I am not a police apologist by any stretch, but can we at least hate them for legitimate reasons?
 
2014-08-19 03:11:44 AM

SmittyBGKY: Warlordtrooper: So when are all the police defenders from the Brown riots going to come in here and call the kid a thug.

To be fair the Brown kid was a thug. Didn't deserve to die but a flash bang to the face would have been ok with me in his case.


Or at least we were led to believe that.
Now we find the robbery didn't take place; while we got two carefully selected incriminating looking stills from the cops showing the 'strong-arm robbery', the actual running video from the store shows him paying for the cigars and leaving. Attorneys for the store deny that the store ever called the police to report any kind of robbery, and claim the owners were taken aback when cops arrived and demanded the video from them.

/I am even less inclined to trust cops now than before, and I didn't think that was even possible. I don't think we can trust anything about this case.
 
2014-08-19 03:17:58 AM

Whole Wheat: CRtwenty: Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!

Cause that's totally what happened.

Yeah, you're right. They were having a bible study, and the cops busted in, blew up a baby, and sprinkled meth all over the place.

I am not a police apologist by any stretch, but can we at least hate them for legitimate reasons?


Blowing up a baby because they can't be bothered to wait a few hours for the suspect to leave for something or other is a pretty legit reason to hate them, I think.
 
2014-08-19 03:18:20 AM

tekmo: The city isn't going to pay because it is immune from tort liability because the state almost certainly has granted itself statutory or common-law sovereign immunity, and the cops are immune because of official immunity.

The victims will sue, and even though they can prove injury and damages, the state will invoke immunity and the courts will agree to throw the case out on that basis.

So the very government which guarantees you equal protection, due process, a right to trial, and remedy for injury will deny you all of that when it is the wrongdoer.

And the perverse outcome of both immunity doctrines is to encourage state actors to perform their duties negligently and recklessly because what the fark are you going to do? Sue them so they can compound your injury by shoving your case right back up your ass?

Sovereign immunity and official immunity are despotism flatly incompatible with the Constitution and any notion of justice, and both bullshiat doctrines belong in history's dustbin.


It is the county sheriff involved in the raid, therefore the county itself is responsible for the outcomes of what happened that night.  Although there is sovereign immunity that exists, in practice for many things such as intentional torts, the state and federal government have waived it by various laws spelling out what can be litigated and under what authority. I am not certain what is available for the victims of this raid and what avenue they have to explore, but almost certainly someone is going to be paying for this mistake.
 
2014-08-19 03:23:42 AM

Daedalus27: tekmo: The city isn't going to pay because it is immune from tort liability because the state almost certainly has granted itself statutory or common-law sovereign immunity, and the cops are immune because of official immunity.

The victims will sue, and even though they can prove injury and damages, the state will invoke immunity and the courts will agree to throw the case out on that basis.

So the very government which guarantees you equal protection, due process, a right to trial, and remedy for injury will deny you all of that when it is the wrongdoer.

And the perverse outcome of both immunity doctrines is to encourage state actors to perform their duties negligently and recklessly because what the fark are you going to do? Sue them so they can compound your injury by shoving your case right back up your ass?

Sovereign immunity and official immunity are despotism flatly incompatible with the Constitution and any notion of justice, and both bullshiat doctrines belong in history's dustbin.

It is the county sheriff involved in the raid, therefore the county itself is responsible for the outcomes of what happened that night.  Although there is sovereign immunity that exists, in practice for many things such as intentional torts, the state and federal government have waived it by various laws spelling out what can be litigated and under what authority. I am not certain what is available for the victims of this raid and what avenue they have to explore, but almost certainly someone is going to be paying for this mistake.


Hopefully before the baby dies of old age.
 
2014-08-19 03:24:01 AM

Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!


Yeah, I'm with you, fark that baby!  He totally had it coming and doesn't deserve any better medical care than a bandaid.
In fact, we should blow grenades up in the faces of all irresponsible parents just to teach those stupid babies a lesson.
 
2014-08-19 03:31:06 AM

Daedalus27: but almost certainly someone is going to be paying for this mistake.


And it ain't going to be the government.
 
2014-08-19 03:31:33 AM
Or at least we were led to believe that.
Now we find the robbery didn't take place; while we got two carefully selected incriminating looking stills from the cops showing the 'strong-arm robbery', the actual running video from the store shows him paying for the cigars and leaving. Attorneys for the store deny that the store ever called the police to report any kind of robbery, and claim the owners were taken aback when cops arrived and demanded the video from them.

Got any links for that. I cant find it. From the video I saw it certainly looks like a robbery to me.
 
2014-08-19 03:36:39 AM

walkingtall: Or at least we were led to believe that.
Now we find the robbery didn't take place; while we got two carefully selected incriminating looking stills from the cops showing the 'strong-arm robbery', the actual running video from the store shows him paying for the cigars and leaving. Attorneys for the store deny that the store ever called the police to report any kind of robbery, and claim the owners were taken aback when cops arrived and demanded the video from them.

Got any links for that. I cant find it. From the video I saw it certainly looks like a robbery to me.


http://crooksandliars.com/2014/08/ferguson-cops-busted-new-video-see ms -show

There is one. No clue what to think of it, but the stores attorneys have made a number of statements that conflict with the cops story. Who knows what the fark really happened at this point.
 
2014-08-19 03:37:15 AM

walkingtall: Or at least we were led to believe that.
Now we find the robbery didn't take place; while we got two carefully selected incriminating looking stills from the cops showing the 'strong-arm robbery', the actual running video from the store shows him paying for the cigars and leaving. Attorneys for the store deny that the store ever called the police to report any kind of robbery, and claim the owners were taken aback when cops arrived and demanded the video from them.

Got any links for that. I cant find it. From the video I saw it certainly looks like a robbery to me.


Wrong thread....?
 
m00
2014-08-19 03:38:39 AM

tekmo: The city isn't going to pay because it is immune from tort liability because the state almost certainly has granted itself statutory or common-law sovereign immunity, and the cops are immune because of official immunity.

The victims will sue, and even though they can prove injury and damages, the state will invoke immunity and the courts will agree to throw the case out on that basis.

So the very government which guarantees you equal protection, due process, a right to trial, and remedy for injury will deny you all of that when it is the wrongdoer.

And the perverse outcome of both immunity doctrines is to encourage state actors to perform their duties negligently and recklessly because what the fark are you going to do? Sue them so they can compound your injury by shoving your case right back up your ass?

Sovereign immunity and official immunity are despotism flatly incompatible with the Constitution and any notion of justice, and both bullshiat doctrines belong in history's dustbin.


And.... you're on my green list.
 
2014-08-19 03:44:04 AM
The Phonesavahs' attorney also says an independent investigation showed authorities used faulty information to get a search warrant.

In June, Habersham County's sheriff said a confidential informant told them he had bought drugs at the home. But they didn't think any children lived there.

The SWAT team did not find the person it was looking for in the home."

------------------------------
Grenades into a home and baby's crib on a suspicion?
Sounds like a war scene in Syria, or Afghanistan.
Oh, its a war, upon americans, by a nazi regime that everyone has ignored for too long.

But, this, and much worse is commonplace in Amerika today.
Standard practice, against Geneva convention & etc

You'd think the citizens would be up in arms over the appearance of a police state in America,
or at least some serious voting.

The time will come when most Americans will welcome an invasion by the UN in the name of human rights.
Then, they will discover that the UN is the same devil with another name.
 
m00
2014-08-19 03:52:20 AM

JSTACAT: The Phonesavahs' attorney also says an independent investigation showed authorities used faulty information to get a search warrant.

In June, Habersham County's sheriff said a confidential informant told them he had bought drugs at the home. But they didn't think any children lived there.

The SWAT team did not find the person it was looking for in the home."

------------------------------
Grenades into a home and baby's crib on a suspicion?
Sounds like a war scene in Syria, or Afghanistan.
Oh, its a war, upon americans, by a nazi regime that everyone has ignored for too long.

But, this, and much worse is commonplace in Amerika today.
Standard practice, against Geneva convention & etc

You'd think the citizens would be up in arms over the appearance of a police state in America,
or at least some serious voting.

The time will come when most Americans will welcome an invasion by the UN in the name of human rights.
Then, they will discover that the UN is the same devil with another name.



I bet you're white, rural/suburban middle class. I apologize if I got that wrong.

Because the police state in America has always existed. White people have only recently been its target. Where you were when black people were the target, Hispanics, or Japanese, or Chinese, or Irish, or Arab? You never stuck out your neck for them. Now that the government is focused on "survivalist groups/preppers" (basically, white people with guns) as the top terrorist organizations, why should everyone else stick their neck out for you? Why aren't you in Ferguson right now showing solidarity with your fellow oppressed citizens?
 
2014-08-19 03:54:03 AM

Whole Wheat: CRtwenty: Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!

Cause that's totally what happened.

Yeah, you're right. They were having a bible study, and the cops busted in, blew up a baby, and sprinkled meth all over the place.

I am not a police apologist by any stretch, but can we at least hate them for legitimate reasons?


I'm gonna need a citation on the meth thing. And even if true these people were staying there BECAUSE THEIR HOUSE BURNED DOWN.
 
2014-08-19 03:55:41 AM

DarkVader: spiritplumber: If you can get disbarred for telling the truth, then the law profession has come full circle to nothing, and we can toss the whole thing in the ocean.

You can get disbarred for saying something publicly that you don't have to say that is contrary to your client's interests.

If you're an attorney, there are things that you must leave unsaid in public no matter how much you would like to say them.  You can say them to your client in private all you want.

But encouraging a lawsuit against your client is pretty much inherently against your client's interests.  And if the law prohibits the payout without a legal settlement or judgment, you have to advise your client that they cannot pay without one.

It's the nature of an adversarial legal system.

/sausage being made.


You betcha. Hell, there are clients who will fire, threaten, or sue an attorney for malpractice for telling them what the judge or opposing counsel MIGHT do and what steps they need to take to prevent it. "I thought you were on MY side?! Why are you arguing against me?!?"

But, it is not in either side's attorney's ability to determine "the truth"--that is for the finder of fact (a judge or jury) to do. The attorney only knows his client's side of the story, and probably a very slanted side at that. Believe it or not, clients lie to their own attorney, or forget to tell them important facts, and this can lead to the attorney telling them or opposing counsel things that are wrong.

Now, with all that said, there ARE kinder ways to say it than: "The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses. After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so" which is a dick way of saying "We're really sorry but we can't pay for the expenses because we're not sure we're the ones who have to pay for it right now."

However, since any admission or acknowledgement of sorrow or sympathy to a victim--even one followed by a disclaimer of liability--is often taken by triers of fact to be an admission of fault, so those are out; and a recent court ruling held that silence can be taken as an admission of guilt or fault (Salinas v. Texas), so they have to say SOMETHING; ergo, a bland passive-voice denial that it can't do anything because reasons. Which sucks, but that's the legal world we live in now.
 
m00
2014-08-19 04:00:28 AM

Gyrfalcon: Salinas v. Texas


Bookmarked that case. Thank for that. I have an ex-girlfriend from 10 years ago who is now a lawyer, and I always wanted to apologize for the breakup. Now I can cite that case as a reason for my email.
 
2014-08-19 04:11:22 AM
m00
2014-08-19 03:52:20 AM

JSTACAT:Then, they will discover that the UN is the same devil with another name.

....................................
I bet you're white, rural/suburban middle class. I apologize if I got that wrong.

Because the police state in America has always existed. White people have only recently been its target. Where you were when black people were the target, Hispanics, or Japanese, or Chinese, or Irish, or Arab? You never stuck out your neck for them. Now that the government is focused on "survivalist groups/preppers" (basically, white people with guns) as the top terrorist organizations, why should everyone else stick their neck out for you? Why aren't you in Ferguson right now showing solidarity with your fellow oppressed citizens?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
partly wrong, look white, but some will dig deeper & have.

You should realise i have always worked hard, respected the law, trusted the constitution and was never violent etc.

With the internet, news from all over can be assimilated and analysed quickly, i have suddenly , in the last few years realised what was happening to others around me.

As a person who takes what happened in Germany in the 30s & 40s quite personally, i can tell you that the current situation in america is very close to nazism.

Very sad... that most americans today will have the same fate as most German citizens did when their govt went nuts;
legal step by legal step, veering off into insanity.

Exactly the way it is happening today, in amerika

Eventually the stink of evil will offend Heaven....[already has]
When G-D pulls the handle, a lot of us will go to Him & a lot more will go to Sheol.

So Be It
 
2014-08-19 04:26:29 AM

SmittyBGKY: Warlordtrooper: So when are all the police defenders from the Brown riots going to come in here and call the kid a thug.

To be fair the Brown kid was a thug. Didn't deserve to die but a flash bang to the face would have been ok with me in his case.


They are attempting to say he was a thug but the statements the 2 women said about him and the guy in the video not being the same has been swept from CNN (which seems to be nothing but a badge bunny convention). Something about very specific socks that didn't match??  Also, the photos of Brown and the guy in the video seems to show one guy rather muscular (in the store) and, not to be insulting, but a bit flabby guy (Brown) in his photos.
Also, as some pointed out... the police (known as lying bastards) indicated he stole a packs of cigars for days, then a box of cigars... neither of which were shown or seen at the scene?? What happened to them?
And, even if he did have them, did that call for 6 shots including 2 to the back of the head?

Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!


The fark are you talking about you idiot ass?  Been smokin` those dried out banana peels dusted with Draino again?  STOP IT!!!!!!


TheWhoppah: As a father, this story makes me feel stabby.  I have to keep reminding myself that the 95% of cops that are horrible people give the rest of them a bad name.


Not a father and the photos upset me and made me sick to my stomach. Also witnessed crooked cops in action, starting at age 10 as a pig repeatedly started to start a fight with an 11 or 12 year old kid because we were committing the heinous act of playing basketball one whole, entire block from home.  (we're all white before you ask, in a historic district with brick streets and doctors, codes and fancy-ass street lights... still had to be a bad ass picking on a kid 1/3 his size and punching him around the playground and poking him in the chest - think I have hated pigs from that point on)
 
m00
2014-08-19 04:27:02 AM

JSTACAT: m00
2014-08-19 03:52:20 AM

JSTACAT:Then, they will discover that the UN is the same devil with another name.

....................................
I bet you're white, rural/suburban middle class. I apologize if I got that wrong.

Because the police state in America has always existed. White people have only recently been its target. Where you were when black people were the target, Hispanics, or Japanese, or Chinese, or Irish, or Arab? You never stuck out your neck for them. Now that the government is focused on "survivalist groups/preppers" (basically, white people with guns) as the top terrorist organizations, why should everyone else stick their neck out for you? Why aren't you in Ferguson right now showing solidarity with your fellow oppressed citizens?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
partly wrong, look white, but some will dig deeper & have.

You should realise i have always worked hard, respected the law, trusted the constitution and was never violent etc.

With the internet, news from all over can be assimilated and analysed quickly, i have suddenly , in the last few years realised what was happening to others around me.

As a person who takes what happened in Germany in the 30s & 40s quite personally, i can tell you that the current situation in america is very close to nazism.

Very sad... that most americans today will have the same fate as most German citizens did when their govt went nuts;
legal step by legal step, veering off into insanity.

Exactly the way it is happening today, in amerika

Eventually the stink of evil will offend Heaven....[already has]
When G-D pulls the handle, a lot of us will go to Him & a lot more will go to Sheol.

So Be It


So why aren't you protesting Ferguson? It kills me many libertarian-espousing groups are suddenly like "oh, well... we have to wait and see." But the Bundy ranch, they're there in 5 minutes. This country is only doomed if we citizens continue to allow ourselves to be divided by race.
 
2014-08-19 04:38:43 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: No rules, no accountability

/any wonder the police are becoming more hated by the day?


i hated them 20 years ago before it was cool. i guess the rest of you are just catching up

/fark you cops.
 
2014-08-19 04:52:17 AM
Their policy seems like a good way for the county to end up getting the shaft in the long run. Rather than paying up front they expose themselves to inflated payouts brought on by lawsuits. Great deal for lawyers, though. This way they get their cut.
 
2014-08-19 05:00:11 AM

Daedalus27: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

Exactly.  No one is saying that the county isn't liable for this mistake by their officers, they are saying that at this point they are prohibited from paying.  That's not to say they are not acknowledging the potential liability.  Can you imagine the corruption that may occur in some places (well more so than we already see) if they could award cash based upon incidents that haven't been litigated and had at least a judge sign off on them.  I wonder why this case hasn't been quietly settled already other than if the number the family is giving the county is some outrageous figure (not that it wouldn't be justified to start extremely high number given the asinine conduct by the officers)


The suit is going to be thrown out under Sovereign Immunity. It is very difficult to get one of these to stick in Georgia.
 
2014-08-19 05:13:21 AM

walkingtall: Or at least we were led to believe that.
Now we find the robbery didn't take place; while we got two carefully selected incriminating looking stills from the cops showing the 'strong-arm robbery', the actual running video from the store shows him paying for the cigars and leaving. Attorneys for the store deny that the store ever called the police to report any kind of robbery, and claim the owners were taken aback when cops arrived and demanded the video from them.

Got any links for that. I cant find it. From the video I saw it certainly looks like a robbery to me.


He was going off to college so you may be right and if this is true we will know soon enough. I'm still putting my bet on thug.
 
2014-08-19 05:15:22 AM

Daedalus27: martissimo: doglover: netweavr: doglover: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

No, they're saying:

The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses. After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so.

They didn't say "Please sue us!" or "We'd love to pay but we can't by law." or any other adult thing. They took the dickhead route and gave a blanket denial with no subtext through a lawyer. Line them up on the chopping block next to the Fergusun PD.

Funny how two people can read the same thing and come to wildly different conclusions.

Which is because the county lawyer is an asshole who can't communicate. If he COULD communicate, he would be saying what you are saying in the words you are using. YOU should be the country lawyer, or at least his mouthpiece.

Instead, he said something awful which makes decent people want to pop him in the mouth.

That is not something he is allowed to do, if you hire a lawyer he can't say anything intentionally detrimental like "yeah he's guilty as sin, so sue him"

pretty sure you get disbarred for shiat like that

Agreed.  His duty is to the taxpayers of the county.  He has to act in the best interest of the county which means defending their action in what ever manner he can.  Like a defense attorney, this can be incredibly difficult and look horrible, but he is required to do so regardless of his personal feelings.  This means while he cannot say they are guilty and will put up a defense no matter how weak, at the same time you can bet he will strongly encourage a healthy settlement ASAP as you do not want th ...


So his duty is to put up a front that costs taxpayers even more money.
 
2014-08-19 05:28:47 AM

netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"


This actually makes me worried about their representation. Why wasn't their first step to sue.
 
2014-08-19 06:01:44 AM

JSTACAT: in amerika


"America" spelled with a K is kind of like the word "sheeple."  Everything else you're saying can be reasonable, but the moment that dumbass word shows up I stop taking you seriously.
 
2014-08-19 06:01:54 AM
This baby is going to grow up and become a super villain.
 
2014-08-19 06:04:14 AM

syrynxx: That toddler was clearly caught committing SWB.  He had it coming.


Asian iirc

Same as it ever was though
 
2014-08-19 06:36:03 AM

spiritplumber: If you can get disbarred for telling the truth, then the law profession has come full circle to nothing, and we can toss the whole thing in the ocean.


Shakespeare warned us all.
 
2014-08-19 07:12:58 AM
Collateral damage.  It's acceptable as long as it gets those drugs off the street.  Right?

/sarcasm alert.
 
2014-08-19 07:13:31 AM

JackCanuck: Duke_leto_Atredes: syrynxx: That toddler was clearly caught committing SWB.  He had it coming.

The baby was put in harms way by the scumbag parents. The war on drugs is lost. We might as well just kill the druggies all of them and nuke the places that grow the drugs

Sooo.... Exterminatus?


*sigh*
I'll call the Inquisition
/again
 
2014-08-19 07:20:16 AM

ReverendJasen: Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!

Yeah, I'm with you, fark that baby!  He totally had it coming and doesn't deserve any better medical care than a bandaid.
In fact, we should blow grenades up in the faces of all irresponsible parents just to teach those stupid babies a lesson.


I never said that I wasn't sorry for the baby. The baby has a long row to hoe even after he/she heals up. Mom isn't running with very good people or making very good decIsions.

The baby has gotten all of the care it needs. People who shack up in meth labs generally do not pay their bills, so this is a non-story.

If mom had the option of paying $5/week for the next ten years to settle her bill, she wouldn't, because that is a pack of smokes or two Red Bulls.

I'm a nurse in a rural hospital, and I deal with this social strata on a daily basis. They get better care than you or me, and never pay a dime.
 
2014-08-19 07:21:28 AM

tekmo: Daedalus27: but almost certainly someone is going to be paying for this mistake.

And it ain't going to be the government.


And therein lies the problem.

None of the people involved have any "skin in the game".  No matter what happens, none the compensation will be coming from the individuals who acted irresponsibly, it will be coming from the taxpayers.  I think that's a major part of the problem.

Look, if a person at a private company, say, a security company that is part of a corporation, did something to you to cause you personal harm, you could sue both the individual involved, and the corporation.  So both have a financial incentive not to harm you unnecessarily.  The individual moreso, because any one individual is going to have fewer resources than the corporation that employs them.

But even if the police act in a reckless manner, as it appears that they did in this case, then they should be required to fork over some of their own cash so that there is some personal pain to making a bad professional mistake.

If they truly thought it was a meth lab, then tossing a flash-bang grenade into the house where children may be present should be a criminal act:  Meth labs have been known to explode.  Even if they thought it was just a meth dealer, though, without the chemicals and apparatus to manufacture it, using a dynamic entry team along with flash-bang grenades to serve a "no-knock" warrant* is a recipe for disaster, the sort of disaster that we regularly hear about here on Fark.

We *REALLY* need to reassess the powers that we give to the police, and the tools and techniques they are allowed to use.


*Which, BTW, should almost *NEVER* be issued.  Almost.
 
2014-08-19 07:25:07 AM
BTW, if you suspect there is a meth lab in Minnesota, you should call the "Clandestine Lab Investigation Team".  Do not pass GO, do not collect $200, just go straight for the CLIT.
 
2014-08-19 07:27:14 AM

Lachwen: JSTACAT: in amerika

"America" spelled with a K is kind of like the word "sheeple."  Everything else you're saying can be reasonable, but the moment that dumbass word shows up I stop taking you seriously.


You should take the sheeple seriously.

imgs.xkcd.com
 
2014-08-19 07:34:40 AM
what a disgusting act by the police how in the fark could those assholes sleep at night knowing they mutilated a small child for no reason
 
2014-08-19 07:42:21 AM
Why did they need to send in the SWAT team to begin with? SWAT team should be something used rarely, if ever, in only the most extreme circumstances. Instead we have out of control police using them all the farking time, just to pick people up.

Why couldn't they have have simply waited until their target went to go get food or something? They do not have to constantly kick down doors. It's partly that they have all this equipment and personnel around so they're going to use it, partly because they have no one restraining them and partly because plenty of the police love the opportunity to play dress up and pretend to be some kind of movie action hero.
 
2014-08-19 07:44:03 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: No rules, no accountability

/any wonder the police are becoming more hated by the day?


NOPE!!!  The police have ruined their own reputation...
 
2014-08-19 07:51:29 AM
What a bunch of a-holes.


I'm sure the lawsuits are being drafted as I type this.
 
MFK
2014-08-19 07:55:32 AM

Whole Wheat: ReverendJasen: Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!

Yeah, I'm with you, fark that baby!  He totally had it coming and doesn't deserve any better medical care than a bandaid.
In fact, we should blow grenades up in the faces of all irresponsible parents just to teach those stupid babies a lesson.

I never said that I wasn't sorry for the baby. The baby has a long row to hoe even after he/she heals up. Mom isn't running with very good people or making very good decIsions.

The baby has gotten all of the care it needs. People who shack up in meth labs generally do not pay their bills, so this is a non-story.

If mom had the option of paying $5/week for the next ten years to settle her bill, she wouldn't, because that is a pack of smokes or two Red Bulls.

I'm a nurse in a rural hospital, and I deal with this social strata on a daily basis. They get better care than you or me, and never pay a dime.



Yeah! fark the poor, amirite?
 
2014-08-19 07:55:39 AM

TheWhoppah: As a father, this story makes me feel stabby.  I have to keep reminding myself that the 95% of cops that are horrible people give the rest of them a bad name.


cache.gawkerassets.com
Hey, there is a good apple in there somewhere.
 
2014-08-19 07:58:38 AM

tekmo: The city isn't going to pay because it is immune from tort liability because the state almost certainly has granted itself statutory or common-law sovereign immunity, and the cops are immune because of official immunity.

The victims will sue, and even though they can prove injury and damages, the state will invoke immunity and the courts will agree to throw the case out on that basis.

So the very government which guarantees you equal protection, due process, a right to trial, and remedy for injury will deny you all of that when it is the wrongdoer.

And the perverse outcome of both immunity doctrines is to encourage state actors to perform their duties negligently and recklessly because what the fark are you going to do? Sue them so they can compound your injury by shoving your case right back up your ass?

Sovereign immunity and official immunity are despotism flatly incompatible with the Constitution and any notion of justice, and both bullshiat doctrines belong in history's dustbin.


i5.photobucket.com
 
2014-08-19 08:30:04 AM

Whole Wheat: I'm a nurse in a rural hospital


No, no you're not.

And if you are, you're pretty farked up.

It's threads like this that make filtering out the idiots easy peasy.
 
2014-08-19 08:42:15 AM
All of this, every last innocent casualty, every destroyed property, is all because the corrupted government has been bought out by Big Pharma and the police are the de facto "enforcers" in Big Pharma's turf war with the cottage pharma network. Every police department in the country simply has to be outfitted for gang warfare, despite there already being at least 50 automatic weapons in police hands for every suspected gang member. That number increases dramatically when you compare it to actual gang members, thanks to "cop math" and the government's overwhelming desire to lock everything down air-tight. Meanwhile, the toys they already have, their gang mentality requires that they simply have to play with, leading to drastically increased risk and needless loss of life and limb for increasing numbers of innocent civilians. And never forget, the courts are on their side. After all, their paychecks all come from the same department. So, good luck getting any justice at all, even when their actions are entirely and obviously illegal, and in direct violation of your constitutional rights. The U.S. is the only country on the planet which allows Pharmaceutical companies to market and advertise directly to the consumers, so deep in their pockets are our "representatives". Sorry to say it, but it will only get worse until enough people actually get enough guts to sacrifice everything to make it better. As JFK said, "When you make peaceful reform impossible, you make violent reform inevitable." This country used to stand for something other than "might makes right." Maybe it will again someday.

My only regret is that I probably won't live to see it.
 
2014-08-19 08:45:25 AM
How come Sean Hannity isn't upset about this?

I mean, he was super duper upset when Cliven Bundy was struggling to get out from under the jack boot that was on his neck.

I wonder what's different about this?
 
2014-08-19 08:50:55 AM

b2theory: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

This actually makes me worried about their representation. Why wasn't their first step to sue.


That was the first step in the process. Have to address the injuring party for compensation first.

Now that the refusal has happened, it can go to court.

First thing that should happen is change of venue, or at least a judge appointed from a district on the other side of the state to look at the case.

Still, the suit will go anywhere because of Sovereign Immunity. Even though everyone up and down the line was completely negligent in this process, the ability to get a settlement is close to nil.
 
2014-08-19 08:55:53 AM

drjekel_mrhyde: How hard is for them to just sit on the house or follow the residents around to make sure that no kids stay in the house
/Seems like the police are getting stupider by the minute


SWAT teams aren't designed to just "sit around" and "watch" things. SWAT teams are hard hitting well trained fighting forces that you call in when everybody feels like suiting up and cracking some badguy heads in, or when there's brown people involved. Your silly civilian expectations of what SWAT does are overly simplistic... like that of some namby pamby child. You just sit there in your comfortable temperature and ergonomic chair while the real men do their jobs and keep you safe.
 
2014-08-19 08:56:33 AM

Warlordtrooper: So when are all the police defenders from the Brown riots going to come in here and call the kid a thug.



He was involved in the strong-arm robbery of a sweet little white baby's binky!
He was charging straight at the officer who was in fear of getting slobbered on!
 
2014-08-19 08:57:22 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: No rules, no accountability

/any wonder the police are becoming more hated by the day?


Paying the baby's medical bills could actually LEAD to accountability.  And after that, they might not even be able to throw grenades into people's houses at 3 AM.

And then where would they be?  I mean let's be reasonable here.
 
2014-08-19 08:59:45 AM
These bozoids should be taken out and shot, pour encourager l'outres.
 
2014-08-19 09:11:50 AM

ecmoRandomNumbers: I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.


This.  And I'm done with this thread.
 
2014-08-19 09:12:48 AM

Another Government Employee: Daedalus27: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

Exactly.  No one is saying that the county isn't liable for this mistake by their officers, they are saying that at this point they are prohibited from paying.  That's not to say they are not acknowledging the potential liability.  Can you imagine the corruption that may occur in some places (well more so than we already see) if they could award cash based upon incidents that haven't been litigated and had at least a judge sign off on them.  I wonder why this case hasn't been quietly settled already other than if the number the family is giving the county is some outrageous figure (not that it wouldn't be justified to start extremely high number given the asinine conduct by the officers)

The suit is going to be thrown out under Sovereign Immunity. It is very difficult to get one of these to stick in Georgia.


File a section 1983 suit in Federal court. In  Lincoln County v. Luning, 133 U.S. 529 (1890), the Court held that county and municipal governments don't always get 11th Amendment protection in suits by citizens.
 
2014-08-19 09:20:23 AM

Warlordtrooper: So when are all the police defenders from the Brown riots going to come in here and call the kid a thug.


How much theft has the baby committed? That might make a difference.
 
2014-08-19 09:21:09 AM

bubo_sibiricus: Whole Wheat: I'm a nurse in a rural hospital

No, no you're not.

And if you are, you're pretty farked up.

It's threads like this that make filtering out the idiots easy peasy.


Yes, I am. What does it matter if I'm not?

The baby will be (is being) treated for the injuries caused.

The mom just throws away the bills and they go away. I know, because I am a RN at a hospital in a rural area of Ohio with a horrible drug problem.

The police were responding to a warrant for a DRUG DEALER. It wasn't for parking violations.

The mom shouldn't have had the baby there. She's an unfit mother and should answer for the baby's injuries.
 
2014-08-19 09:31:09 AM

Daedalus27: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

Exactly.  No one is saying that the county isn't liable for this mistake by their officers, they are saying that at this point they are prohibited from paying.  That's not to say they are not acknowledging the potential liability.  Can you imagine the corruption that may occur in some places (well more so than we already see) if they could award cash based upon incidents that haven't been litigated and had at least a judge sign off on them.  I wonder why this case hasn't been quietly settled already other than if the number the family is giving the county is some outrageous figure (not that it wouldn't be justified to start extremely high number given the asinine conduct by the officers)


I disagree.  All that has to be done in my state and many others is to file a notice of claim that specifies exactly why the county (or other governmental body) owes the claimant money, and how much money the claimant alleges the government owes with  supporting evidence presented by affidavit.  In fact, state law requires this step before any suit can be brought against the state or governmental subdivision.  That spares the government the costs of a trial and allows citizens to handle the case themselves in simple matters where liability is obvious and when it isn't then suit can be filed. The government may choose to pay the claim in full, or pay part of the claim or deny it completely.  All of these claims are public records and the actions taken by government are in open hearings subject to public scrutiny.  The same public scrutiny that is given to handing out public contracts is given to claims against the government so it's no more subject to abuse than any other governmental activity.
 
2014-08-19 09:35:16 AM

lack of warmth: ecmoRandomNumbers: I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.

This.  And I'm done with this thread.


No.   Because the taxpayers will end up footing the bill.

The lawsuits should bankrupt the cops who actually were on that raid.  But that won't happen.
 
2014-08-19 09:36:27 AM
Do you have any idea how much property they will need to confiscate to pay those bills? No persons home or family will be safe while they are paying off those greedy doctors.
 
2014-08-19 09:44:59 AM

ChaosStar: JackCanuck: Duke_leto_Atredes: syrynxx: That toddler was clearly caught committing SWB.  He had it coming.

The baby was put in harms way by the scumbag parents. The war on drugs is lost. We might as well just kill the druggies all of them and nuke the places that grow the drugs

Sooo.... Exterminatus?

*sigh*
I'll call the Inquisition
/again


The Inquisition, what a show.
 
2014-08-19 09:47:51 AM
Fine. Just toss a flashbang at the children of the cops involved and we'll call it a day.
 
2014-08-19 09:48:21 AM
Much of this hate on all cops is tied to the militias and other gun nuts.

Posse Commitatus prevents the military from American soil. (Except it doesn't).

If they can get the guns and armor away from the cops, the militias and other gun nuts will feel free to water the tree of liberty.

Eric the Patriotic Sniper is one of the reasons why cops use armor and other heavy equipment.

thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.com

These guys are two other reasons why cops use heavy equipment (they fought cops with 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb)

i2.cdn.turner.com

For the people who hate all cops, how do you like your new friends?
 
2014-08-19 09:50:46 AM
Is there a fund setup for this kid somewhere? Does anyone know?

Daedalus27: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

Exactly.  No one is saying that the county isn't liable for this mistake by their officers, they are saying that at this point they are prohibited from paying.  That's not to say they are not acknowledging the potential liability.  Can you imagine the corruption that may occur in some places (well more so than we already see) if they could award cash based upon incidents that haven't been litigated and had at least a judge sign off on them.  I wonder why this case hasn't been quietly settled already other than if the number the family is giving the county is some outrageous figure (not that it wouldn't be justified to start extremely high number given the asinine conduct by the officers)


Right. I'm sure the County is trying very hard to help the kid out.

Ohh, I know. How about they have their police not get Army boners and execute violent SWAT raids on basic drug search warrants? Crazy idea right!
 
2014-08-19 09:52:41 AM

tekmo: Sovereign immunity and official immunity are despotism flatly incompatible with the Constitution and any notion of justice, and both bullshiat doctrines belong in history's dustbin.



Amen. When cops lose their pensions and houses for such shiat then, and only then, will they begin to show restraint.
 
2014-08-19 09:53:15 AM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Much of this hate on all cops is tied to the militias and other gun nuts.

Posse Commitatus prevents the military from American soil. (Except it doesn't).

If they can get the guns and armor away from the cops, the militias and other gun nuts will feel free to water the tree of liberty.

Eric the Patriotic Sniper is one of the reasons why cops use armor and other heavy equipment.

[thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.com image 359x239]

These guys are two other reasons why cops use heavy equipment (they fought cops with 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb)

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 356x200]

For the people who hate all cops, how do you like your new friends?


What on Earth are you going on about?

The boston bombers "fought" cops with pipe bombs? Sorry guy, that BS isn't flying. The police can clearly differentiate between a militia outpost and a normal house that is being searched for some drugs.

PS the militarization of the police began way before either of those two events so you get the Fark Derp award for the day. Congrats!
 
2014-08-19 09:59:22 AM

m00: It kills me many libertarian-espousing groups are suddenly like "oh, well... we have to wait and see." But the Bundy ranch, they're there in 5 minutes.


And now you're on my green list.
 
2014-08-19 10:00:16 AM

FarkaDark: Do you have any idea how much property they will need to confiscate to pay those bills? No persons home or family will be safe while they are paying off those greedy doctors.


Come on man, such a lazy troll.
 
2014-08-19 10:04:45 AM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Much of this hate on all cops is tied to the militias and other gun nuts.

Posse Commitatus prevents the military from American soil. (Except it doesn't).

If they can get the guns and armor away from the cops, the militias and other gun nuts will feel free to water the tree of liberty.

Eric the Patriotic Sniper is one of the reasons why cops use armor and other heavy equipment.

[thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.com image 359x239]

These guys are two other reasons why cops use heavy equipment (they fought cops with 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb)

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 356x200]

For the people who hate all cops, how do you like your new friends?



It's like gun nuts don't understand that encouraging the widespread ownership of modern military-grade firearms gives the cops a perfect excuse for why they need to militarize.
 
2014-08-19 10:05:02 AM

nocturnal001: Ohh, I know. How about they have their police not get Army boners and execute violent SWAT raids on basic drug search warrants? Crazy idea right!


This warrant was sworn out and executed on the basis of hearsay. The police made *zero* attempt to gather evidence before the raid, *zero* effort to verify whether the hearsay was even reliable, and *zero* attempt to even visually determine whether the suspect was even present in the premises (or just who was present,) before they landed upon the occupants of the house with jack-booted feet. In other words, they did no "police work" at all, and just played Rambo at the expense of people who it turned out, were 100% innocent. This fact should be stressed the hardest, because innocence is supposed to be your refuge against such roughshod treatment by the very people we trust to protect us from the "real criminals", (whom it should be noted, they are coming to resemble more and more each day.)
 
2014-08-19 10:05:30 AM

jmr61: TheWhoppah: As a father, this story makes me feel stabby.  I have to keep reminding myself that the 95% of cops that are horrible people give the rest of them a bad name.

This one is more about the lawyers.


Lawyers didn't toss that flashbang.

/check your targets
//kid was sleeping with intent
 
2014-08-19 10:06:17 AM

nocturnal001: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Much of this hate on all cops is tied to the militias and other gun nuts.

Posse Commitatus prevents the military from American soil. (Except it doesn't).

If they can get the guns and armor away from the cops, the militias and other gun nuts will feel free to water the tree of liberty.

Eric the Patriotic Sniper is one of the reasons why cops use armor and other heavy equipment.

[thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.com image 359x239]

These guys are two other reasons why cops use heavy equipment (they fought cops with 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb)

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 356x200]

For the people who hate all cops, how do you like your new friends?

What on Earth are you going on about?

The boston bombers "fought" cops with pipe bombs? Sorry guy, that BS isn't flying.


Firefight with police

Shortly after midnight on April 19, a Watertown police officer identified the brothers in a Honda Civic and the stolen SUV, and a ferocious gunfight followed on the 100 block of Laurel St, between the brothers and police arriving at the scene. An estimated 200-300 rounds of ammunition were fired and at least one further bomb and several "crude grenades" were thrown.
According to Watertown Police Chief Edward Deveau, the brothers had an "arsenal of guns." Also according to Deveau, the older brother, Tamerlan, ran out of ammunition and was tackled and apprehended by police, while the younger brother Dzhokhar drove the stolen SUV toward police and over Tamerlan, dragging him a short distance down the street.


You can stop with the personal attacks.
 
2014-08-19 10:07:40 AM

Chummer45: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Much of this hate on all cops is tied to the militias and other gun nuts.

Posse Commitatus prevents the military from American soil. (Except it doesn't).

If they can get the guns and armor away from the cops, the militias and other gun nuts will feel free to water the tree of liberty.

Eric the Patriotic Sniper is one of the reasons why cops use armor and other heavy equipment.

[thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.com image 359x239]

These guys are two other reasons why cops use heavy equipment (they fought cops with 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb)

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 356x200]

For the people who hate all cops, how do you like your new friends?


It's like gun nuts don't understand that encouraging the widespread ownership of modern military-grade firearms gives the cops a perfect excuse for why they need to militarize.


They didn't think their cunning plan through.
 
2014-08-19 10:08:20 AM

martissimo: doglover: netweavr: doglover: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

No, they're saying:

The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses. After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so.

They didn't say "Please sue us!" or "We'd love to pay but we can't by law." or any other adult thing. They took the dickhead route and gave a blanket denial with no subtext through a lawyer. Line them up on the chopping block next to the Fergusun PD.

Funny how two people can read the same thing and come to wildly different conclusions.

Which is because the county lawyer is an asshole who can't communicate. If he COULD communicate, he would be saying what you are saying in the words you are using. YOU should be the country lawyer, or at least his mouthpiece.

Instead, he said something awful which makes decent people want to pop him in the mouth.

That is not something he is allowed to do, if you hire a lawyer he can't say anything intentionally detrimental like "yeah he's guilty as sin, so sue him"

pretty sure you get disbarred for shiat like that


Generally, yeah..."duty of zealous advocacy" is the standard in many jurisdictions.
 
2014-08-19 10:13:13 AM

swahnhennessy: Their policy seems like a good way for the county to end up getting the shaft in the long run. Rather than paying up front they expose themselves to inflated payouts brought on by lawsuits. Great deal for lawyers, though. This way they get their cut.


The lawyer defending the county almost certainly DOESN'T get "a cut".  And plaintiff's lawyers generally prefer a settlement now to trial in a year, appeals court in another year, then back to the lower court to squabble about attachment proceedings in year three...
 
2014-08-19 10:16:59 AM

Daedalus27: Agreed.  His duty is to the taxpayers of the county.  He has to act in the best interest of the county which means defending their action in what ever manner he can.  Like a defense attorney, this can be incredibly difficult and look horrible, but he is required to do so regardless of his personal feelings.  This means while he cannot say they are guilty and will put up a defense no matter how weak, at the same time you can bet he will strongly encourage a healthy settlement ASAP as you do not want th ...


If his goal is truly to act in the best interest of the county and if the police officers involved are guilty of gross misconduct, then he should find a way to throw them under the proverbial bus, like withdrawing from the case in a flashy way. That would be in the best interest of the county.
 
2014-08-19 10:17:07 AM

nocturnal001: FarkaDark: Do you have any idea how much property they will need to confiscate to pay those bills? No persons home or family will be safe while they are paying off those greedy doctors.

Come on man, such a lazy troll.


Trolling =/= sarcasm.  And I put a lot of work into that dumb comment
 
2014-08-19 10:17:28 AM
I like what SWAT teams in Massachusetts are doing.  They are declaring themselves to be "private corporations" thereby exempting them from open records laws.  It's so cute!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/06/26/massachus et ts-swat-teams-claim-theyre-private-corporations-immune-from-open-recor ds-laws/

Fark the police.
 
2014-08-19 10:17:28 AM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Chummer45: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Much of this hate on all cops is tied to the militias and other gun nuts.

Posse Commitatus prevents the military from American soil. (Except it doesn't).

If they can get the guns and armor away from the cops, the militias and other gun nuts will feel free to water the tree of liberty.

Eric the Patriotic Sniper is one of the reasons why cops use armor and other heavy equipment.

[thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.com image 359x239]

These guys are two other reasons why cops use heavy equipment (they fought cops with 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb)

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 356x200]

For the people who hate all cops, how do you like your new friends?


It's like gun nuts don't understand that encouraging the widespread ownership of modern military-grade firearms gives the cops a perfect excuse for why they need to militarize.

They didn't think their cunning plan through.



Also, instead of making guns harder for criminals to get their hands on, their solution is to just have everyone own and carry guns.  The arms race method of vigilante law enforcement - a libertarian's dream.
 
2014-08-19 10:17:29 AM

Whole Wheat: bubo_sibiricus: Whole Wheat: I'm a nurse in a rural hospital

No, no you're not.

And if you are, you're pretty farked up.

It's threads like this that make filtering out the idiots easy peasy.

Yes, I am. What does it matter if I'm not?

The baby will be (is being) treated for the injuries caused.

The mom just throws away the bills and they go away. I know, because I am a RN at a hospital in a rural area of Ohio with a horrible drug problem.

The police were responding to a warrant for a DRUG DEALER. It wasn't for parking violations.

The mom shouldn't have had the baby there. She's an unfit mother and should answer for the baby's injuries.


Yes, because when your house burns down, you've always got all kinds of good options:

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/toddler-critically-burned-durin g- swat-raid/nf9SJ/
 
2014-08-19 10:18:04 AM
This is why people sue. The end.
 
2014-08-19 10:18:19 AM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: nocturnal001: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Much of this hate on all cops is tied to the militias and other gun nuts.

Posse Commitatus prevents the military from American soil. (Except it doesn't).

If they can get the guns and armor away from the cops, the militias and other gun nuts will feel free to water the tree of liberty.

Eric the Patriotic Sniper is one of the reasons why cops use armor and other heavy equipment.

[thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.com image 359x239]

These guys are two other reasons why cops use heavy equipment (they fought cops with 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb)

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 356x200]

For the people who hate all cops, how do you like your new friends?

What on Earth are you going on about?

The boston bombers "fought" cops with pipe bombs? Sorry guy, that BS isn't flying.

Firefight with police

Shortly after midnight on April 19, a Watertown police officer identified the brothers in a Honda Civic and the stolen SUV, and a ferocious gunfight followed on the 100 block of Laurel St, between the brothers and police arriving at the scene. An estimated 200-300 rounds of ammunition were fired and at least one further bomb and several "crude grenades" were thrown.
According to Watertown Police Chief Edward Deveau, the brothers had an "arsenal of guns." Also according to Deveau, the older brother, Tamerlan, ran out of ammunition and was tackled and apprehended by police, while the younger brother Dzhokhar drove the stolen SUV toward police and over Tamerlan, dragging him a short distance down the street.

You can stop with the personal attacks.


What personal attack?

Again. So your claim is that the militarization of the police happened because of the Boston Bombers. Fascinating. Did they borrow Obama's magical time machine to do so?
 
2014-08-19 10:19:17 AM

FarkaDark: nocturnal001: FarkaDark: Do you have any idea how much property they will need to confiscate to pay those bills? No persons home or family will be safe while they are paying off those greedy doctors.

Come on man, such a lazy troll.

Trolling =/= sarcasm.  And I put a lot of work into that dumb comment


It is very hard to tell sometimes between satire, troll, and stupidity. Please disregard.
 
2014-08-19 10:22:21 AM
Don't have a kid if you aren't willing to endure it.
 
2014-08-19 10:28:05 AM

knottybynature: charlesmartel11235: non-story. illegal assault baby

He had one of those high-capacity pampers, too...


Can someone post the baby "get to the choppa" pic? I don't have it and I can't believe no one posted it already.

/also see that Marine down by San Diego that got shot what, 23 times? Because a cop got trigger happy and the rest followed suit. Dude was Hispanic, and I haven't heard a word of it since the story broke it was the cops' fault.
//not sure how I feel about the mom putting the kid in front of her, but hey, they both lived, so whatever works I guess
 
2014-08-19 10:31:22 AM

nocturnal001: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: nocturnal001: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Much of this hate on all cops is tied to the militias and other gun nuts.

Posse Commitatus prevents the military from American soil. (Except it doesn't).

If they can get the guns and armor away from the cops, the militias and other gun nuts will feel free to water the tree of liberty.

Eric the Patriotic Sniper is one of the reasons why cops use armor and other heavy equipment.

[thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.com image 359x239]

These guys are two other reasons why cops use heavy equipment (they fought cops with 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb)

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 356x200]

For the people who hate all cops, how do you like your new friends?

What on Earth are you going on about?

The boston bombers "fought" cops with pipe bombs? Sorry guy, that BS isn't flying.

Firefight with police

Shortly after midnight on April 19, a Watertown police officer identified the brothers in a Honda Civic and the stolen SUV, and a ferocious gunfight followed on the 100 block of Laurel St, between the brothers and police arriving at the scene. An estimated 200-300 rounds of ammunition were fired and at least one further bomb and several "crude grenades" were thrown.
According to Watertown Police Chief Edward Deveau, the brothers had an "arsenal of guns." Also according to Deveau, the older brother, Tamerlan, ran out of ammunition and was tackled and apprehended by police, while the younger brother Dzhokhar drove the stolen SUV toward police and over Tamerlan, dragging him a short distance down the street.

You can stop with the personal attacks.

What personal attack?

Again. So your claim is that the militarization of the police happened because of the Boston Bombers. Fascinating. Did they borrow Obama's magical time machine to do so?


Lol- "200-300" rounds were fired (by whom?).. the boston bombers only had *one* gun if I remember correctly.

Do I need to post the photo of the unarmed senior-citizen ladies who had their truck shot up with 131 rounds in California, because the newspaper they threw on the ground "sounded like a gunshot", to a trained, "professional observer" (a cop)?
 
2014-08-19 10:31:52 AM

Whole Wheat: The police were responding to a warrant for a DRUG DEALER. It wasn't for parking violations.


So go there with armed officers but not a militarized SWAT team, knock and announce, and then enter without throwing a farking *BOMB* in the house.

Oh, and you might want to just make sure the target of the arrest warrant is home at the time of the raid.

No-knock raids using SWAT teams like that get innocent people and cops themselves injured and killed, and the justification is to "prevent destruction of evidence".

If you burst into a home unnanounced with explosives and dressed like soldiers or ninjas you shouldn't be in the least surprised if people shoot at you, especially if they haven't committed a crime.
 
2014-08-19 10:34:51 AM

nocturnal001: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: nocturnal001: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Much of this hate on all cops is tied to the militias and other gun nuts.

Posse Commitatus prevents the military from American soil. (Except it doesn't).

If they can get the guns and armor away from the cops, the militias and other gun nuts will feel free to water the tree of liberty.

Eric the Patriotic Sniper is one of the reasons why cops use armor and other heavy equipment.

[thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.com image 359x239]

These guys are two other reasons why cops use heavy equipment (they fought cops with 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb)

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 356x200]

For the people who hate all cops, how do you like your new friends?

What on Earth are you going on about?

The boston bombers "fought" cops with pipe bombs? Sorry guy, that BS isn't flying.

Firefight with police

Shortly after midnight on April 19, a Watertown police officer identified the brothers in a Honda Civic and the stolen SUV, and a ferocious gunfight followed on the 100 block of Laurel St, between the brothers and police arriving at the scene. An estimated 200-300 rounds of ammunition were fired and at least one further bomb and several "crude grenades" were thrown.
According to Watertown Police Chief Edward Deveau, the brothers had an "arsenal of guns." Also according to Deveau, the older brother, Tamerlan, ran out of ammunition and was tackled and apprehended by police, while the younger brother Dzhokhar drove the stolen SUV toward police and over Tamerlan, dragging him a short distance down the street.

You can stop with the personal attacks.

What personal attack?

Again. So your claim is that the militarization of the police happened because of the Boston Bombers. Fascinating. Did they borrow Obama's magical time machine to do so?


You need to learn some more history, do you? You were ignorant about the Boston Bombers. Here let me school you on the militarization of LEOs.


John Brown 1859. Precipitated a war that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans
Clyde Barrow 1930s. Helped force the FBI into a national police forced armed with sub machine guns.

Americans have been stealing military arms since at least 1859 for their devious plots. And cops at all levels of LE have been responding.

Anything else you need schooling on, Fark Derp Winner of the Day?
 
2014-08-19 10:35:59 AM

Whole Wheat: because I am a RN


And I'm Eleanor Roosevelt.  Prove otherwise.

>DRUG DEALER

Ooooh!  I'm sure that baby was dealing some heavy duty drugs to deserve a flash-bang grenade in its crib!

I'd call you a racist, but you're just a total farkhead, which takes precedence over everything.
 
2014-08-19 10:37:22 AM

dittybopper: If you burst into a home unnanounced with explosives and dressed like soldiers or ninjas you shouldn't be in the least surprised if people shoot at you, especially if they haven't committed a crime.


Has there been a case where SWAT does a no knock warrant on the wrong house and someone in the house kills a police officer? If so, I hope they were acquitted and awarded damages.
 
2014-08-19 10:40:46 AM

FarkedOver: I like what SWAT teams in Massachusetts are doing.  They are declaring themselves to be "private corporations" thereby exempting them from open records laws.  It's so cute!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/06/26/massachus et ts-swat-teams-claim-theyre-private-corporations-immune-from-open-recor ds-laws/

Fark the police.


I don't think they really thought that one through.  If they are acting under the aegis of a private corporation instead of the government, they can be held personally liable for their individual acts, and the corporation can be sued to recover damages, which means that all of their expensive SWAT equipment is legally vulnerable seizure to satisfy a judgement against them (as I don't think they have a real revenue stream).
 
2014-08-19 10:43:15 AM

dittybopper: FarkedOver: I like what SWAT teams in Massachusetts are doing.  They are declaring themselves to be "private corporations" thereby exempting them from open records laws.  It's so cute!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/06/26/massachus et ts-swat-teams-claim-theyre-private-corporations-immune-from-open-recor ds-laws/

Fark the police.

I don't think they really thought that one through.  If they are acting under the aegis of a private corporation instead of the government, they can be held personally liable for their individual acts, and the corporation can be sued to recover damages, which means that all of their expensive SWAT equipment is legally vulnerable seizure to satisfy a judgement against them (as I don't think they have a real revenue stream).


I honestly don't know how they can call themselves "private" while everything they have is bought and paid for by tax payers.... I think what they are doing is trying to have it both ways, which hopefully blows up in their goddamn face faster than a flash bang.
 
2014-08-19 10:47:29 AM

Whole Wheat: bubo_sibiricus: Whole Wheat: I'm a nurse in a rural hospital

No, no you're not.

And if you are, you're pretty farked up.

It's threads like this that make filtering out the idiots easy peasy.

Yes, I am. What does it matter if I'm not?

The baby will be (is being) treated for the injuries caused.

The mom just throws away the bills and they go away. I know, because I am a RN at a hospital in a rural area of Ohio with a horrible drug problem.

The police were responding to a warrant for a DRUG DEALER. It wasn't for parking violations.

The mom shouldn't have had the baby there. She's an unfit mother and should answer for the baby's injuries.


Bit of info. Mother and baby had arrived the afternoon of the raid from Wisconsin. Whether she knew her brother was actively dealing when she got there wasn't clear.

Someone said that the warrant was issued only on a C.I.'s word. I think there had been a couple of confirmed buys by LE.  However, there WERE much better ways to handle this than a No Knock. Just some simple surveillance and a traffic stop would have done the trick.
 
2014-08-19 10:47:43 AM

FarkedOver: dittybopper: If you burst into a home unnanounced with explosives and dressed like soldiers or ninjas you shouldn't be in the least surprised if people shoot at you, especially if they haven't committed a crime.

Has there been a case where SWAT does a no knock warrant on the wrong house and someone in the house kills a police officer? If so, I hope they were acquitted and awarded damages.


Yes.  A number of times.

In some cases, juries refused to convict.  In others, the person has been tried, convicted, and sentenced to death for killing a police officer, though in that particular case the appeals process ended up with him being convicted only of manslaughter and only serving 10 years.
 
2014-08-19 10:51:42 AM

dittybopper: FarkedOver: dittybopper: If you burst into a home unnanounced with explosives and dressed like soldiers or ninjas you shouldn't be in the least surprised if people shoot at you, especially if they haven't committed a crime.

Has there been a case where SWAT does a no knock warrant on the wrong house and someone in the house kills a police officer? If so, I hope they were acquitted and awarded damages.

Yes.  A number of times.

In some cases, juries refused to convict.  In others, the person has been tried, convicted, and sentenced to death for killing a police officer, though in that particular case the appeals process ended up with him being convicted only of manslaughter and only serving 10 years.


Thanks.  That's some interesting shiat.
 
2014-08-19 10:54:27 AM

bubo_sibiricus: And I'm Eleanor Roosevelt.  Prove otherwise.


Actually, that's pretty easy.  You may be *AN* Eleanor Roosevelt, but *THE* Eleanor Roosevelt was born in 1884, which would make her 130 years old, which is past the known maximum lifespan of a human being (record is approximately 122.5 years).

You'd have to be Connor MacLeod in drag.
 
2014-08-19 10:55:53 AM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: nocturnal001: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: nocturnal001: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Much of this hate on all cops is tied to the militias and other gun nuts.

Posse Commitatus prevents the military from American soil. (Except it doesn't).

If they can get the guns and armor away from the cops, the militias and other gun nuts will feel free to water the tree of liberty.

Eric the Patriotic Sniper is one of the reasons why cops use armor and other heavy equipment.

[thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.com image 359x239]

These guys are two other reasons why cops use heavy equipment (they fought cops with 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb)

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 356x200]

For the people who hate all cops, how do you like your new friends?

What on Earth are you going on about?

The boston bombers "fought" cops with pipe bombs? Sorry guy, that BS isn't flying.

Firefight with police

Shortly after midnight on April 19, a Watertown police officer identified the brothers in a Honda Civic and the stolen SUV, and a ferocious gunfight followed on the 100 block of Laurel St, between the brothers and police arriving at the scene. An estimated 200-300 rounds of ammunition were fired and at least one further bomb and several "crude grenades" were thrown.
According to Watertown Police Chief Edward Deveau, the brothers had an "arsenal of guns." Also according to Deveau, the older brother, Tamerlan, ran out of ammunition and was tackled and apprehended by police, while the younger brother Dzhokhar drove the stolen SUV toward police and over Tamerlan, dragging him a short distance down the street.

You can stop with the personal attacks.

What personal attack?

Again. So your claim is that the militarization of the police happened because of the Boston Bombers. Fascinating. Did they borrow Obama's magical time machine to do so?

You need to learn some more history, do you? You were ignorant about the Boston Bombers. Here let me school you on the militarization of LEOs.


John Bro ...


You are making zero sense.

Your first claim was that the cops needed all this firepower in response to the Boston bombers and that sniper guy. Then you go on to say that police have always been using military arms and have been steadily escalating every since the 1800s?
 
2014-08-19 11:02:04 AM

dittybopper: Whole Wheat: The police were responding to a warrant for a DRUG DEALER. It wasn't for parking violations.

So go there with armed officers but not a militarized SWAT team, knock and announce, and then enter without throwing a farking *BOMB* in the house.

Oh, and you might want to just make sure the target of the arrest warrant is home at the time of the raid.

No-knock raids using SWAT teams like that get innocent people and cops themselves injured and killed, and the justification is to "prevent destruction of evidence".

If you burst into a home unnanounced with explosives and dressed like soldiers or ninjas you shouldn't be in the least surprised if people shoot at you, especially if they haven't committed a crime.


Especially when you do it at 2 AM.

I would rather all the drug dealers in the world be given an opportunity to flush their drugs rather than have SWAT teams tossing grenades into houses at 2 AM.
 
2014-08-19 11:02:43 AM

nocturnal001: FarkaDark: nocturnal001: FarkaDark: Do you have any idea how much property they will need to confiscate to pay those bills? No persons home or family will be safe while they are paying off those greedy doctors.

Come on man, such a lazy troll.

Trolling =/= sarcasm.  And I put a lot of work into that dumb comment

It is very hard to tell sometimes between satire, troll, and stupidity. Please disregard.


Understood, disregarded. (Not done making sarcastic and/or dumb comments though)
 
2014-08-19 11:07:37 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: No rules, no accountability

/any wonder the police are becoming more hated by the day?


This.
 
2014-08-19 11:10:23 AM

Daedalus27: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

Exactly.  No one is saying that the county isn't liable for this mistake by their officers, they are saying that at this point they are prohibited from paying.  That's not to say they are not acknowledging the potential liability.  Can you imagine the corruption that may occur in some places (well more so than we already see) if they could award cash based upon incidents that haven't been litigated and had at least a judge sign off on them.  I wonder why this case hasn't been quietly settled already other than if the number the family is giving the county is some outrageous figure (not that it wouldn't be justified to start extremely high number given the asinine conduct by the officers)


I think this comment is correct. You really don't want local officials (or officials at  anylevel) to be able to hand out cash without a very, very clear audit trail and as much public visibility as possible. Otherwise every time one of the Police Chief's friends or relatives gets a parking ticket, they also get their kitchen remodeled for free on the County's dime.
 
2014-08-19 11:12:33 AM

SilentStrider: start throwing them in jail for contempt. that'll get their attention quickly.


Flashbangs in a jail cell? You're damn right that'll get their attention!

/I kee*BOOM*
//tinnitus tone
 
2014-08-19 11:15:36 AM

TheWhoppah: As a father, this story makes me feel stabby.  I have to keep reminding myself that the 95% of cops that are horrible people give the rest of them a bad name.


Actually, most cops are pretty decent with little children. It's once they stop being adorable that you have to worry.
 
2014-08-19 11:15:49 AM

Lokkii: Daedalus27: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

Exactly.  No one is saying that the county isn't liable for this mistake by their officers, they are saying that at this point they are prohibited from paying.  That's not to say they are not acknowledging the potential liability.  Can you imagine the corruption that may occur in some places (well more so than we already see) if they could award cash based upon incidents that haven't been litigated and had at least a judge sign off on them.  I wonder why this case hasn't been quietly settled already other than if the number the family is giving the county is some outrageous figure (not that it wouldn't be justified to start extremely high number given the asinine conduct by the officers)

I think this comment is correct. You really don't want local officials (or officials at  anylevel) to be able to hand out cash without a very, very clear audit trail and as much public visibility as possible. Otherwise every time one of the Police Chief's friends or relatives gets a parking ticket, they also get their kitchen remodeled for free on the County's dime.


Thirded.

If every nephew or cousin of a city council can claim injury, get paid damages and then send some (or all) of it back to their politician relation, there would be no money for football stadiums, aquariums, and other massive opportunities for graft.
 
2014-08-19 11:25:00 AM
The SWAT team responsible should really do the decent thing, here:

www.cardcow.com
 
2014-08-19 11:35:50 AM
The baby was such a good kid, but he just hang around with the wrong crowd.

Everyone called the baby a gentle giant.
 
2014-08-19 11:43:10 AM

SlothB77: The baby was such a good kid, but he just hang around with the wrong crowd.

Everyone called the baby a gentle giant.


I'm sick of everyone calling him "a kid". That baby was 9 pounds 6 ounces for Christ's sake.
 
2014-08-19 11:44:38 AM

Daedalus27: martissimo: doglover: netweavr: doglover: netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"

No, they're saying:

The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses. After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so.

They didn't say "Please sue us!" or "We'd love to pay but we can't by law." or any other adult thing. They took the dickhead route and gave a blanket denial with no subtext through a lawyer. Line them up on the chopping block next to the Fergusun PD.

Funny how two people can read the same thing and come to wildly different conclusions.

Which is because the county lawyer is an asshole who can't communicate. If he COULD communicate, he would be saying what you are saying in the words you are using. YOU should be the country lawyer, or at least his mouthpiece.

Instead, he said something awful which makes decent people want to pop him in the mouth.

That is not something he is allowed to do, if you hire a lawyer he can't say anything intentionally detrimental like "yeah he's guilty as sin, so sue him"

pretty sure you get disbarred for shiat like that

Agreed.  His duty is to the taxpayers of the county.  He has to act in the best interest of the county which means defending their action in what ever manner he can.  Like a defense attorney, this can be incredibly difficult and look horrible, but he is required to do so regardless of his personal feelings.  This means while he cannot say they are guilty and will put up a defense no matter how weak, at the same time you can bet he will strongly encourage a healthy settlement ASAP as you do not want th ...


Agreed. A government representative can't just say, "Bring it on!"
 
2014-08-19 11:51:37 AM

netweavr: To be fair the county is legally forbidden to pay unless compelled by a Court. This is to prevent someone scamming the county out of money (eg the Mayor's BIL stubs his toe, better pay millions).

They're not saying "we don't want to" they're saying "we cannot legally do it, please sue us so we can"


Exactly, This happens all the time and I hate headlines like this story.
When I was on city government we would have to deny claims for the insurance process to begin.
If a journalist wanted to be a dick they could write something "City denies sweet grandmother's claim for precious Beanie Baby collection flooded by storm sewer back up"
 
2014-08-19 12:01:46 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.


YEAH! That'll show em! Bankrupt Habersham County and make it so they can't pay for any of the services that the citizens of Habersham County rely upon! Because fark all those people who live there! It's all their fault that that baby got grenaded in the face! YEAH!
 
2014-08-19 12:06:00 PM

RevMark: ecmoRandomNumbers: I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.

YEAH! That'll show em! Bankrupt Habersham County and make it so they can't pay for any of the services that the citizens of Habersham County rely upon! Because fark all those people who live there! It's all their fault that that baby got grenaded in the face! YEAH!


I think cops should be taught how to bowl. Roll the flashbang. If you have to use it at all.

But yeah anything that will advance the disarming of cops is fine with some people. If the county can't provide services, they can't provide necessary equipment to protect cops from...oh gee I don't know....drug dealers who pack lots of heat to protect themselves from cops and from other drug dealers and maybe some of their jilted customers trying to rip them off.
 
2014-08-19 12:09:21 PM

RevMark: YEAH! That'll show em! Bankrupt Habersham County and make it so they can't pay for any of the services that the citizens of Habersham County rely upon! Because fark all those people who live there! It's all their fault that that baby got grenaded in the face! YEAH!


Well, in a way it is.  They're ultimately responsible for electing the local leadership who are, in turn, responsible for thinking 2AM no-knock swat raids for drugs are a reasonable thing to do.
 
2014-08-19 12:11:30 PM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: RevMark: ecmoRandomNumbers: I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.

YEAH! That'll show em! Bankrupt Habersham County and make it so they can't pay for any of the services that the citizens of Habersham County rely upon! Because fark all those people who live there! It's all their fault that that baby got grenaded in the face! YEAH!

I think cops should be taught how to bowl. Roll the flashbang. If you have to use it at all.

But yeah anything that will advance the disarming of cops is fine with some people. If the county can't provide services, they can't provide necessary equipment to protect cops from...oh gee I don't know....drug dealers who pack lots of heat to protect themselves from cops and from other drug dealers and maybe some of their jilted customers trying to rip them off.


So you support the hyper-militarization of civilian law enforcement?
 
2014-08-19 12:40:10 PM

Whole Wheat: ReverendJasen: Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!

Yeah, I'm with you, fark that baby!  He totally had it coming and doesn't deserve any better medical care than a bandaid.
In fact, we should blow grenades up in the faces of all irresponsible parents just to teach those stupid babies a lesson.

I never said that I wasn't sorry for the baby. The baby has a long row to hoe even after he/she heals up. Mom isn't running with very good people or making very good decIsions.

The baby has gotten all of the care it needs. People who shack up in meth labs generally do not pay their bills, so this is a non-story.

If mom had the option of paying $5/week for the next ten years to settle her bill, she wouldn't, because that is a pack of smokes or two Red Bulls.

I'm a nurse in a rural hospital, and I deal with this social strata on a daily basis. They get better care than you or me, and never pay a dime.


You sound.... dishonest.
 
2014-08-19 12:48:01 PM
You know what would be funny? Hilarious even?


If we had one law of the land, and it applied the same to everyone. No exceptions for the Nobility or constables. Make everyone abide by the same rules as the peasants. No special cases treating anyone differently. Only exemption allowed gets to be the military and it can't by deployed domestically.


Pity no one had though of this before. Then we wouldn't have police running around with anything the peasants can't buy too. Hilariously we'd have police arrested for sweeping people with the muzzle of a loaded weapon for assault, just like you would if a peasant did it.
 
2014-08-19 12:50:33 PM

dittybopper: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: RevMark: ecmoRandomNumbers: I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.

YEAH! That'll show em! Bankrupt Habersham County and make it so they can't pay for any of the services that the citizens of Habersham County rely upon! Because fark all those people who live there! It's all their fault that that baby got grenaded in the face! YEAH!

I think cops should be taught how to bowl. Roll the flashbang. If you have to use it at all.

But yeah anything that will advance the disarming of cops is fine with some people. If the county can't provide services, they can't provide necessary equipment to protect cops from...oh gee I don't know....drug dealers who pack lots of heat to protect themselves from cops and from other drug dealers and maybe some of their jilted customers trying to rip them off.

So you support the hyper-militarization of civilian law enforcement?


No more than I support the hyper-militarization of civilians. But both have happened and I'm sure you'll agree both have to be controlled.

Because Eric the Patriotic Sniper and his buddies are just as dangerous as cops who violated department procedures.

And hyper-militarized isn't the proper term. The first time the police met up with the Boston Bombers, the police were driving cruisers, some in solo patrol. The next time police met up with the Boston Bomber, they were properly equipped to meet the cop-killers who had a few hours ago thrown 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb at them. Certainly the proper response given the multiple bomb attack the police had just faced.
 
2014-08-19 12:51:03 PM

drayno76: Between everything Alex Jones is starting to make sense and that's REALLY frightening.


No. Just because the conspiratorial word salad he spews from his fat farking face is sometimes arranged in a manner consistent with reality doesn't mean he's making sense.

Throw enough turds on the wall, eventually one of them will look like Jesus.
 
2014-08-19 01:08:14 PM
The baby should have stopped resisting.
 
2014-08-19 01:12:16 PM

drjekel_mrhyde: How hard is for them to just sit on the house or follow the residents around to make sure that no kids stay in the house
/Seems like the police are getting stupider by the minute


But the drug addict who gave them the tip said there were no kids there. Seems like a reliable source. No need to check on information like that.
 
2014-08-19 01:13:48 PM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: RevMark: ecmoRandomNumbers: I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.

YEAH! That'll show em! Bankrupt Habersham County and make it so they can't pay for any of the services that the citizens of Habersham County rely upon! Because fark all those people who live there! It's all their fault that that baby got grenaded in the face! YEAH!

I think cops should be taught how to bowl. Roll the flashbang. If you have to use it at all.

But yeah anything that will advance the disarming of cops is fine with some people. If the county can't provide services, they can't provide necessary equipment to protect cops from...oh gee I don't know....drug dealers who pack lots of heat to protect themselves from cops and from other drug dealers and maybe some of their jilted customers trying to rip them off.


Yes arming cops as if they are soldiers is an absolute must in order to continue a pointless war on undocumented pharmacy operations.  Preventing people from making decisions about their own bodies and lives ranks far ahead of the right to not have your face blown off.
 
2014-08-19 01:16:16 PM

m00: So why aren't you protesting Ferguson? It kills me many libertarian-espousing groups are suddenly like "oh, well... we have to wait and see." But the Bundy ranch, they're there in 5 minutes. This country is only doomed if we citizens continue to allow ourselves to be divided by race.


What libertarian-espousing groups are you talking about? Reason magazine has been all over this story, and Ferguson too. In fact, they've been worrying about police militarization for years.
 
2014-08-19 01:22:26 PM
i1.sndcdn.com
 
2014-08-19 01:29:44 PM

Big_Fat_Liar: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: RevMark: ecmoRandomNumbers: I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.

YEAH! That'll show em! Bankrupt Habersham County and make it so they can't pay for any of the services that the citizens of Habersham County rely upon! Because fark all those people who live there! It's all their fault that that baby got grenaded in the face! YEAH!

I think cops should be taught how to bowl. Roll the flashbang. If you have to use it at all.

But yeah anything that will advance the disarming of cops is fine with some people. If the county can't provide services, they can't provide necessary equipment to protect cops from...oh gee I don't know....drug dealers who pack lots of heat to protect themselves from cops and from other drug dealers and maybe some of their jilted customers trying to rip them off.

Yes arming cops as if they are soldiers is an absolute must in order to continue a pointless war on undocumented pharmacy operations.  Preventing people from making decisions about their own bodies and lives ranks far ahead of the right to not have your face blown off.


I support the legalization of certain illegal substances. I don't support disarming the cops in order to achieve it.

Cops have a terribly dangerous job to do. They need things to do their jobs that I don't need. And they certainly need to employ them properly. This was not done in this case. And I'm sure the government in charge of those cops will pay up a nice amount in civil damages. And police departments all over the country will be evaluating their procedures before and after that large settlement is announced.
 
2014-08-19 01:31:17 PM

TheWhoppah: jmr61: TheWhoppah: As a father, this story makes me feel stabby.  I have to keep reminding myself that the 95% of cops that are horrible people give the rest of them a bad name.

This one is more about the lawyers.

No, the lawyers are just emotionless pragmatons.  The officer that tossed a stun grenade into a baby's crib needs to be crucified... and I don't mean figuratively.


I strongly agree. There needs to be extremely harsh punishments for cops who break the law  or do stupid dangerous crap like this. The cop who threw a grenade into a babys crib..he deserves death.

The only way the cops are going to stop acting like they do is if there are extremely harsh penalties for their behavior. At some point people will give up on the ineffective riots and protesting and just do what needs to be done to keep themselves safe.
 
2014-08-19 01:33:15 PM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: No more than I support the hyper-militarization of civilians. But both have happened and I'm sure you'll agree both have to be controlled.


Sure.  Tell you what:  If non-LEO civilians can't have removable magazines with more than 10 rounds, then neither can the police.

Deal?

We peg what the police can legally use to the exact same equipment that the people they oversee can own.  Exactly the same.  And the criminal penalties for violating those rules are exactly the same.

That means no flash bangs, no short barrel shotguns, no full auto (at least in my state), unless they individually go through the same legal hoops as a civilian must to own them.  Nothing that is "For Law Enforcement Use Only".

If it's a crime to wear body armor for a non-LEO, ANY non-LEO*, then it's a crime for the police to wear it also.

I'd be down with that.

See, that's what compromise is all about, meeting in the middle.  I'm glad we can agree.

*Some states have laws that prohibit felons from owning or wearing body armor, which seems to be unconstitutional to me:  You have a right to self-defense even if you are a felon, and body armor is *PASSIVE* self-defense, one that can't be used offensively like an actual weapon.
 
2014-08-19 01:33:28 PM

FarkedOver: dittybopper: If you burst into a home unnanounced with explosives and dressed like soldiers or ninjas you shouldn't be in the least surprised if people shoot at you, especially if they haven't committed a crime.

Has there been a case where SWAT does a no knock warrant on the wrong house and someone in the house kills a police officer? If so, I hope they were acquitted and awarded damages.
i

Usually, the `defender's' relatives get the settlement, if any, as the home owner is dead.  When voters wise up and demand an end to the war on some drugs, this particular taxpayer funded lottery (`you got shot? think of the children and just rot') will end.
Death of one innocent by cop isn't worth preventing the death of 10,000 `junkies' by their own hands - and, yeah, look to instructing one's own children to check the Vaults of Erowid (bad trips/trainwrecks) before seeing the `pusher' (sell it all OTC at just above cost).

You too, might be added to the list:   http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/drug-war-victim/
 
2014-08-19 01:37:03 PM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: And police departments all over the country will be evaluating their procedures before and after that large settlement is announced.


img3.wikia.nocookie.net

That's not going to happen until such a time when it becomes possible to hold actual individuals accountable.
 
2014-08-19 01:37:32 PM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Big_Fat_Liar: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: RevMark: ecmoRandomNumbers: I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.

YEAH! That'll show em! Bankrupt Habersham County and make it so they can't pay for any of the services that the citizens of Habersham County rely upon! Because fark all those people who live there! It's all their fault that that baby got grenaded in the face! YEAH!

I think cops should be taught how to bowl. Roll the flashbang. If you have to use it at all.

But yeah anything that will advance the disarming of cops is fine with some people. If the county can't provide services, they can't provide necessary equipment to protect cops from...oh gee I don't know....drug dealers who pack lots of heat to protect themselves from cops and from other drug dealers and maybe some of their jilted customers trying to rip them off.

Yes arming cops as if they are soldiers is an absolute must in order to continue a pointless war on undocumented pharmacy operations.  Preventing people from making decisions about their own bodies and lives ranks far ahead of the right to not have your face blown off.

I support the legalization of certain illegal substances. I don't support disarming the cops in order to achieve it.

Cops have a terribly dangerous job to do. They need things to do their jobs that I don't need. And they certainly need to employ them properly. This was not done in this case. And I'm sure the government in charge of those cops will pay up a nice amount in civil damages. And police departments all over the country will be evaluating their procedures before and after that large settlement is announced.


This simply isn't true.
 
2014-08-19 01:40:52 PM

China White Tea: That's not going to happen until such a time when it becomes possible to hold actual individuals accountable.


Also, when I say "accountable", I don't mean, "HUGE CLEARANCE SALE!  Shoot one unarmed, restrained black man in the back in front of hundreds of witnesses with cameras for the low low price of a minimum-sentence manslaughter conviction!  Double-credit for time served pre-conviction!  Offer valid for law enforcement only!" accountability, either.
 
2014-08-19 01:43:41 PM

dittybopper: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: No more than I support the hyper-militarization of civilians. But both have happened and I'm sure you'll agree both have to be controlled.

Sure.  Tell you what:  If non-LEO civilians can't have removable magazines with more than 10 rounds, then neither can the police.

Deal?

We peg what the police can legally use to the exact same equipment that the people they oversee can own.  Exactly the same.  And the criminal penalties for violating those rules are exactly the same.

That means no flash bangs, no short barrel shotguns, no full auto (at least in my state), unless they individually go through the same legal hoops as a civilian must to own them.  Nothing that is "For Law Enforcement Use Only".

If it's a crime to wear body armor for a non-LEO, ANY non-LEO*, then it's a crime for the police to wear it also.

I'd be down with that.

See, that's what compromise is all about, meeting in the middle.  I'm glad we can agree.

*Some states have laws that prohibit felons from owning or wearing body armor, which seems to be unconstitutional to me:  You have a right to self-defense even if you are a felon, and body armor is *PASSIVE* self-defense, one that can't be used offensively like an actual weapon.


Compare and contrast Eric the Patriotic Sniper and the Cop Sniper everyone was complaining about in Ferguson and their magazine capacity. Eric probably had 2.5 times the amount of bullets aimed at LEOs than the Cop Sniper had in his unaimed rifle.

You're assuming that everyone who wants to kill a cop is going to play by your rules of equality.

These guys didn't

upload.wikimedia.org

Lots of people before and after them haven't. And won't. And that's why police need heavy, heavy equipment and tactics.
 
2014-08-19 01:48:36 PM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: dittybopper: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: No more than I support the hyper-militarization of civilians. But both have happened and I'm sure you'll agree both have to be controlled.

Sure.  Tell you what:  If non-LEO civilians can't have removable magazines with more than 10 rounds, then neither can the police.

Deal?

We peg what the police can legally use to the exact same equipment that the people they oversee can own.  Exactly the same.  And the criminal penalties for violating those rules are exactly the same.

That means no flash bangs, no short barrel shotguns, no full auto (at least in my state), unless they individually go through the same legal hoops as a civilian must to own them.  Nothing that is "For Law Enforcement Use Only".

If it's a crime to wear body armor for a non-LEO, ANY non-LEO*, then it's a crime for the police to wear it also.

I'd be down with that.

See, that's what compromise is all about, meeting in the middle.  I'm glad we can agree.

*Some states have laws that prohibit felons from owning or wearing body armor, which seems to be unconstitutional to me:  You have a right to self-defense even if you are a felon, and body armor is *PASSIVE* self-defense, one that can't be used offensively like an actual weapon.

Compare and contrast Eric the Patriotic Sniper and the Cop Sniper everyone was complaining about in Ferguson and their magazine capacity. Eric probably had 2.5 times the amount of bullets aimed at LEOs than the Cop Sniper had in his unaimed rifle.

You're assuming that everyone who wants to kill a cop is going to play by your rules of equality.

These guys didn't

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x80]

Lots of people before and after them haven't. And won't. And that's why police need heavy, heavy equipment and tactics.


How about this: Police can have any weapon they want, but if you use deadly force, you are no longer a cop the next day. So it had better be worth it.
 
2014-08-19 01:58:35 PM

YixilTesiphon: m00: So why aren't you protesting Ferguson? It kills me many libertarian-espousing groups are suddenly like "oh, well... we have to wait and see." But the Bundy ranch, they're there in 5 minutes. This country is only doomed if we citizens continue to allow ourselves to be divided by race.

What libertarian-espousing groups are you talking about? Reason magazine has been all over this story, and Ferguson too. In fact, they've been worrying about police militarization for years.


Hell, for *DECADES*:

Can Soldiers Be Peace Officers?  The Waco Disaster and The Militarization of American Law Enforcement - 1997

Militarized Law Enforcement: The Drug War's Deadly Fruit - 2000

Smash-up Policing: When law enforcement goes military - 2000

Militarization of the Home Front - 2005

What of 'Posse Comitatus'? - 2005

When Cops Go Commando, It's No Laughing Matter - 2011

Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America - 2012

Rise of the Warrior Cop: Is it time to reconsider the militarization of American policing? - 2013


 The trend started back in the 1980's, but was largely unnoticed until the early 1990's.
 
2014-08-19 02:02:39 PM
If i was a father, i think in a situation like this, it would be very hard to resist going out cop-hunting.
 
2014-08-19 02:04:46 PM

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: These guys didn't

Lots of people before and after them haven't. And won't. And that's why police need heavy, heavy equipment and tactics.


Had the police been equipped with conventional deer rifles, they would have been able to stop those two very quickly.   They weren't wearing armor that would stop a .30'06 Springfield or .308 Winchester.

So thank you for confirming my point.
 
2014-08-19 02:08:32 PM
Jiro Dreams Of McRibs supports this kind of policing:

www.slate.com
 
2014-08-19 02:10:56 PM
Wait a minute:  If I intentionally aim a rifle at someone who is unarmed and no immediate threat to me or others, that's assault, is it not?

So when is Snipey McFerguson going to get charged for glassing the crowd like that?
 
2014-08-19 02:14:56 PM

dittybopper: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: These guys didn't

Lots of people before and after them haven't. And won't. And that's why police need heavy, heavy equipment and tactics.

Had the police been equipped with conventional deer rifles, they would have been able to stop those two very quickly.   They weren't wearing armor that would stop a .30'06 Springfield or .308 Winchester.

So thank you for confirming my point.


People are exceedingly bad at assessing risk.  The correct response to the NH shootout is basically, "So the fark what?"  and maybe the addition of a few high caliber rifles to police arsenals.  Not military grade equipment, just something with more punch than a .223.

"One time some criminals put up a good fight against the police," is not a rational reason to turn the entire police force into a small army.  It's a thing that basically never farking happens.

Maximal response for statistical outliers is idiotic, and results solely from the emotional impact resulting from those events - it has nothing to do with any actual threat posed.
 
2014-08-19 02:26:17 PM

Whole Wheat: ReverendJasen: Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!

Yeah, I'm with you, fark that baby!  He totally had it coming and doesn't deserve any better medical care than a bandaid.
In fact, we should blow grenades up in the faces of all irresponsible parents just to teach those stupid babies a lesson.

I never said that I wasn't sorry for the baby. The baby has a long row to hoe even after he/she heals up. Mom isn't running with very good people or making very good decIsions.

The baby has gotten all of the care it needs. People who shack up in meth labs generally do not pay their bills, so this is a non-story.

If mom had the option of paying $5/week for the next ten years to settle her bill, she wouldn't, because that is a pack of smokes or two Red Bulls.

I'm a nurse in a rural hospital, and I deal with this social strata on a daily basis. They get better care than you or me, and never pay a dime.


So punishing the innocent baby is okay with you or are you contending it's a meth dealer too?   Do you sit in moral judgement of all of your patients like your own little death panel or do you just play one on fark?
 
2014-08-19 02:27:05 PM
m00
2014-08-19 04:27:02 AM
So why aren't you protesting Ferguson?......

---------------------------------------------------------
Everyone has a choice of style in the use of their resources.
Some choose violence, and there is a place for that.
Some use logic & Law.
Some use the pen, which is mightier than the sword.
And some Pray, which is mightier than all.

For my part, i'm 2500 miles away, and i know for a fact no one in Ferguson wants me to come over there, except, perhaps Amy...
I would start politics and Amy would tweet the results, etc.

My choice is to create the logical tools that will function as an anti-virus in society.
Once a person's mind is infused with correct logic, the correct actions will occur naturally.

Notice that my anti viral logics are delayed reaction, and the results are more noticeable the further down the road y'get.

Several Furguson threads changed tone when i put out a couple of logics, i noticed posters using those logics later, knowingly or unknowingly.

If here is any possibility of positive evolution in society, it will be done by perfecting logic,
not by fear and violence.
got that?

Logic,
how does it work?
..................................................................... . ..................

Lachwen
2014-08-19 06:01:44 AM

JSTACAT: in amerika

"America" spelled with a K is kind of like the word "sheeple." Everything else you're saying can be reasonable, but the moment that dumbass word shows up I stop taking you seriously.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- - -------------------------------
Your brain is crippled if you can't compute because of resentment towards a word.

ameri-k-a symbolises a certain corruption, decay, in the original product.

lets clean up the social programming, one thought at a time.
 
2014-08-19 02:28:49 PM
Jiro Dreams Of McRibs:

And hyper-militarized isn't the proper term. The first time the police met up with the Boston Bombers, the police were driving cruisers, some in solo patrol. The next time police met up with the Boston Bomber, they were properly equipped to meet the cop-killers who had a few hours ago thrown 5 pipe bombs and a pressure cooker bomb at them. Certainly the proper response given the multiple bomb attack the police had just faced.

The "proper response" is to send in so many heavily armed hyped up cops they shoot at everyone and everything in the area including each other!?

/From an article about the Boston Bomber Shootout
More than a dozen officers suffered minor injuries during the mayhem, but none was believed to have been wounded by the suspects. The only serious wound was suffered by Richard Donohue, a transit cop with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, who was hit in the groin by a police bullet and began to bleed profusely.
/source http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/boston-bombing-anniversary/too-many- g uns-how-shootout-bombing-suspects-spiraled-chaos-n80236

I would have hoped that when cops became so trigger happy they're shooting each other, people would wake up and recognize the insanity. Apparently I was too optimistic.
 
2014-08-19 02:40:12 PM

stan unusual: Whole Wheat: ReverendJasen: Whole Wheat: The mom who chose to house her baby at a meth lab put the baby in harm's way. Grow up!

Yeah, I'm with you, fark that baby!  He totally had it coming and doesn't deserve any better medical care than a bandaid.
In fact, we should blow grenades up in the faces of all irresponsible parents just to teach those stupid babies a lesson.

I never said that I wasn't sorry for the baby. The baby has a long row to hoe even after he/she heals up. Mom isn't running with very good people or making very good decIsions.

The baby has gotten all of the care it needs. People who shack up in meth labs generally do not pay their bills, so this is a non-story.

If mom had the option of paying $5/week for the next ten years to settle her bill, she wouldn't, because that is a pack of smokes or two Red Bulls.

I'm a nurse in a rural hospital, and I deal with this social strata on a daily basis. They get better care than you or me, and never pay a dime.

So punishing the innocent baby is okay with you or are you contending it's a meth dealer too?   Do you sit in moral judgement of all of your patients like your own little death panel or do you just play one on fark?


OH. EM. GEE, drama queen.

The mom put the baby in harm's way. The baby is getting care at a burn center and looking for payment.

Why is it heartless to expect that she be held accountable for endangering her child?

I don't think the SWAT team intended to blow up a baby when they set out on their drug raid that day.

I give all patients the same level of care (excellent), but yes, I do judge them for being lazy slobs and welfare baby factories. Until you have taken care of these lazy system-gaming slobs, you have no idea what you are talking about. Your only interaction with them is hearing about the "tragic poor" on FARK and MSNBC.
 
2014-08-19 02:44:46 PM

Whole Wheat: Why is it heartless to expect that she be held accountable for endangering her child?


She endangered her child by staying in a relative's home where a SWAT team conducted a raid and found no suspect and no drugs?

Can't imagine the mental gymnastics you had to go through to get there.

Is the traditional sarcastic blame-the-victim commentary still kosher with the new Fark rules?  I can't tell.
 
2014-08-19 02:53:27 PM

YixilTesiphon: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs:

Cops have a terribly dangerous job to do. They need things to do their jobs that I don't need.

This simply isn't true.


Exactly right.  It is, in fact, far more dangerous to be a farmer than to be a cop.
 
2014-08-19 02:55:18 PM

dittybopper: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs supports this kind of policing:

[www.slate.com image 850x566]


I certainly do support this capability.  St. Louis County is a large county of over 1 million residents immediately outside an major city.  They should have the capability to respond to significant events that may pop up in a large urban environment.  I am not saying they should be patrolling with it or use on routine warrant service or other tasks departments tend to use them, but St. Louis County isn't some bumfark county with 2,000 people in the middle of nowhere that has one violent crime a year when Joe Bob goes on a bender.  They have a significant population that requires increased capabilities to respond to abnormal events that may require a large tactical deployment and armored capabilities to combat active shooter situations. You hope you don't need such a force but you damn sure want it when some events occur or you are scrambling to make do with substandard response that can cost lives.
 
2014-08-19 02:57:38 PM

FarkedOver: I like what SWAT teams in Massachusetts are doing.  They are declaring themselves to be "private corporations" thereby exempting them from open records laws.  It's so cute!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/06/26/massachus et ts-swat-teams-claim-theyre-private-corporations-immune-from-open-recor ds-laws/

Fark the police.


Wouldn't that also make them have to follow the gun (and associated) laws in the state? Massachusetts ain't Texas, and no way a private corporation in Mass is getting fully automatic weapons, tanks, APC's, grenades or even ballistic armor.

If a private corporation can bypass all those laws in the state, than maybe I'll become a masshole myself.
 
2014-08-19 02:57:38 PM
I would like to go to HABERSHAM COUNTY, Ga.
and give their politics a tune up.


And i am tempted to give furgeson a tune up as well.

Amy K. Nelson @AmyKNelson · 55m

"No More Pigs In Our Community" #Ferguson August 19, 2014 http://instagram.com/p/r4ucTNssmH/

...............
No more pigs can be refined....politically, using logics.

There is a way to tune up the whole country....
i'm work'n on it
one logic brick at a time.
until there is a pyramid of logic.
 
2014-08-19 02:58:08 PM

Daedalus27: dittybopper: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs supports this kind of policing:

[www.slate.com image 850x566]

I certainly do support this capability.  St. Louis County is a large county of over 1 million residents immediately outside an major city.  They should have the capability to respond to significant events that may pop up in a large urban environment.  I am not saying they should be patrolling with it or use on routine warrant service or other tasks departments tend to use them, but St. Louis County isn't some bumfark county with 2,000 people in the middle of nowhere that has one violent crime a year when Joe Bob goes on a bender.  They have a significant population that requires increased capabilities to respond to abnormal events that may require a large tactical deployment and armored capabilities to combat active shooter situations. You hope you don't need such a force but you damn sure want it when some events occur or you are scrambling to make do with substandard response that can cost lives.


Can you point to an event where this sort of vehicle has saved lives? I am genuinely curious.
 
2014-08-19 03:29:14 PM
China White Tea [TotalFark]
2014-08-19 02:44:46 PM

Whole Wheat: Why is it heartless to expect that she be held accountable for endangering her child?

She endangered her child by staying in a relative's home where a SWAT team conducted a raid and found no suspect and no drugs?

==============================================
By extension, she endangered her child by living in America...poor logic.

What is even more ridiculous is that just one officer or a remote cam setup could stake the place out & sooner or later the suspect would show him/herself outside & be taken easily with little or no violence.
Or just find him on FBi, twittr etc.
Heck, just find his car & in plain clothes, start looking at it, touching it, playing with it, sit on it, pee on the tyres & he will be out there in no time...
better logic, a whole lot cheaper and safer.
 
2014-08-19 03:33:26 PM

YixilTesiphon: Daedalus27: dittybopper: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs supports this kind of policing:

[www.slate.com image 850x566]

I certainly do support this capability.  St. Louis County is a large county of over 1 million residents immediately outside an major city.  They should have the capability to respond to significant events that may pop up in a large urban environment.  I am not saying they should be patrolling with it or use on routine warrant service or other tasks departments tend to use them, but St. Louis County isn't some bumfark county with 2,000 people in the middle of nowhere that has one violent crime a year when Joe Bob goes on a bender.  They have a significant population that requires increased capabilities to respond to abnormal events that may require a large tactical deployment and armored capabilities to combat active shooter situations. You hope you don't need such a force but you damn sure want it when some events occur or you are scrambling to make do with substandard response that can cost lives.

Can you point to an event where this sort of vehicle has saved lives? I am genuinely curious.


North Hollywood shootout in LA, they had to appropriate armored cars to evacuate wounded officers, civilians, and trapped individuals which is the most common event that is pointed to.  However yesterday morning in South Los Angeles, there was a shooting on the freeway and gun battle with 2 suspects that an armored vehicle was used to provide protection from officers and help officers resolve through lethal force an active shooter using a California illegal weapon, http://ktla.com/2014/08/18/police-pursuit-ends-in-south-l-a-after-suv - occupant-opens-fire-on-officers-search-underway/.  I am not suggesting that every department or even most should have these or that you would use them more than a few times a year or less (hopefully).  However state agencies, very large police departments, and large counties should have the capability if only so we can strip these small departments of their wannabe GI Joe vehicles and the misuse we see with them.
 
2014-08-19 03:42:08 PM

Daedalus27: However state agencies, very large police departments, and large counties should have the capability if only so we can strip these small departments of their wannabe GI Joe vehicles and the misuse we see with them.


I could see that. But given recent use I am not inclined to trust any department with them. Has St. Louis County used it to save lives, or only to escalate protests?
 
2014-08-19 03:49:47 PM

Chummer45: It's like gun nuts don't understand that encouraging the widespread ownership of modern military-grade firearms gives the cops a perfect excuse for why they need to militarize.



It's people who don't understand, or are afraid of guns, that don't realize that perfectly ordinary shotguns and hunting rifles are as dangerous or more dangerous than "military-grade" firearms. Some of the "military grade" firearms even started out as ordinary shotguns and hunting rifles.
 
m00
2014-08-19 03:52:00 PM

YixilTesiphon: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: Big_Fat_Liar: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: RevMark: ecmoRandomNumbers: I hope their lawsuit bankrupts the county.

YEAH! That'll show em! Bankrupt Habersham County and make it so they can't pay for any of the services that the citizens of Habersham County rely upon! Because fark all those people who live there! It's all their fault that that baby got grenaded in the face! YEAH!

I think cops should be taught how to bowl. Roll the flashbang. If you have to use it at all.

But yeah anything that will advance the disarming of cops is fine with some people. If the county can't provide services, they can't provide necessary equipment to protect cops from...oh gee I don't know....drug dealers who pack lots of heat to protect themselves from cops and from other drug dealers and maybe some of their jilted customers trying to rip them off.

Yes arming cops as if they are soldiers is an absolute must in order to continue a pointless war on undocumented pharmacy operations.  Preventing people from making decisions about their own bodies and lives ranks far ahead of the right to not have your face blown off.

I support the legalization of certain illegal substances. I don't support disarming the cops in order to achieve it.

Cops have a terribly dangerous job to do. They need things to do their jobs that I don't need. And they certainly need to employ them properly. This was not done in this case. And I'm sure the government in charge of those cops will pay up a nice amount in civil damages. And police departments all over the country will be evaluating their procedures before and after that large settlement is announced.

This simply isn't true.


Well, they make it dangerous for themselves when they run around in military-grade tactical gear and shoot people for no reason. But that's not an argument for more tactical gear.
 
m00
2014-08-19 03:53:59 PM

China White Tea: Whole Wheat: Why is it heartless to expect that she be held accountable for endangering her child?

She endangered her child by staying in a relative's home where a SWAT team conducted a raid and found no suspect and no drugs?

Can't imagine the mental gymnastics you had to go through to get there.


Is she black and/or poor?
 
2014-08-19 03:57:05 PM

YixilTesiphon: Daedalus27: However state agencies, very large police departments, and large counties should have the capability if only so we can strip these small departments of their wannabe GI Joe vehicles and the misuse we see with them.

I could see that. But given recent use I am not inclined to trust any department with them. Has St. Louis County used it to save lives, or only to escalate protests?


Of course we can discuss their choice of use of the vehicles.  It is questionable to use those vehicles to intimidate crowds in these situations, however, that doesn't mean they shouldn't possess these tools in the first place.  They should just be left in the storage yard or command post instead of deployed but that is a department policy decision.  Seeing those vehicles on the front line of a skirmish line is pure intimidation.  I do think they should be fairly close at hand given the sporadic gunfire we have seen which certainly may become relevant to their use, but not for pushing crowds away.  If they want that, why not use these and be done with it:

i1318.photobucket.com
 
2014-08-19 03:59:37 PM

knobmaker: YixilTesiphon: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs:

Cops have a terribly dangerous job to do. They need things to do their jobs that I don't need.

This simply isn't true.

Exactly right.  It is, in fact, far more dangerous to be a farmer than to be a cop.


Top 10 list:

1. Logging workers
2. Fishers and related fishing workers
3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers
4. Roofers
5. Structural iron and steel workers
6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors
7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers
8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers
9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers
10. Construction laborers

Police officer doesn't seem to be on the list.

Another list had law-enforcement officers at #10. Farmers were at #5.

The "Top 25 Most Dangerous Jobs in the World!" list (as opposed to just the US) listed law-enforcement at #14, and farmers/ranchers at #17.

So depending upon who you ask (and what countries you include), being a police officer is either far less dangerous than farming, or just slightly more dangerous.
 
2014-08-19 04:04:03 PM

m00: Is she black and/or poor?


I've only seen the kid, but he is distinctly white.  Can't remark on the latter.  The were staying with the relative because their home in WI burned down.
 
m00
2014-08-19 04:26:57 PM

China White Tea: m00: Is she black and/or poor?

I've only seen the kid, but he is distinctly white.  Can't remark on the latter.  The were staying with the relative because their home in WI burned down.


So typically, mental gymnastics occur because of the notions of tribes, which is a very ingrained primate concept. I think humans by default only care about others in their tribe -- in modern times this is ethnicity, age, socioeconomic class, language, background, and familiarity. It's very easy to feel sympathy for someone who is like you, because that's almost as easy as feeling sympathy for yourself.

And I also think part of any sort of spiritual journey in one's life needs to include learning how to feel sympathy for those who are least like you.
 
2014-08-19 04:29:37 PM
The second floor is an entirely separate apartment, but the police chose to raid the second floor in addition to the first floor they had a warrent for when they couldn't find their target. They should be screwed based on that.
 
2014-08-19 04:35:56 PM

Daedalus27: It is questionable to use those vehicles to intimidate crowds in these situations, however, that doesn't mean they shouldn't possess these tools in the first place.


I like to look at results. If police forces with these vehicles act like occupying armies, then apparently police forces can't be trusted to use the appropriately.

Similarly, the government can't be trusted to regulate the press, so we don't give it that power, even though lots of people have come up with at least superficially plausible scenarios in which it would help some problem.

/also think, as a Pennsylvania taxpayer, that Penn State can't be trusted with a sports program
 
2014-08-19 04:48:43 PM

Daedalus27: dittybopper: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs supports this kind of policing:

[www.slate.com image 850x566]

I certainly do support this capability.  St. Louis County is a large county of over 1 million residents immediately outside an major city.  They should have the capability to respond to significant events that may pop up in a large urban environment.  I am not saying they should be patrolling with it or use on routine warrant service or other tasks departments tend to use them, but St. Louis County isn't some bumfark county with 2,000 people in the middle of nowhere that has one violent crime a year when Joe Bob goes on a bender.  They have a significant population that requires increased capabilities to respond to abnormal events that may require a large tactical deployment and armored capabilities to combat active shooter situations. You hope you don't need such a force but you damn sure want it when some events occur or you are scrambling to make do with substandard response that can cost lives.


I think I'll take that risk.

The odds of units like that being abused are much, much greater than the odds of them being used in a situation where more conventional police tactics are inadequate.

I'm willing to bet that the number of times innocent people, or non-violent law breakers, were unnecessarily injured or killed by such units far exceeds the number of times they actually did something useful and protective of society.

Originally, SWAT-type units were formed for the express purpose of dealing with the worst of the worst scenarios:  Hostages scenarios, major terrorist attacks, that sort of thing.  But as time wore on, and as those sorts of situations were found to be so uncommon that the units were essentially being unused, then the urge to "use them or lose them" forced them into being used for the very things you say they shouldn't be:  Stuff like routine arrest warrants, especially if the person is known to have a Raven .25 ACP pistol.

But if we *MUST* have them, and there is a case to be made for *SMALL* units in the major cities, then here is what we need to do:

1.   Most importantly, get rid of the military style uniforms and equipment.  You wear your normal patrol uniform.  If you need extra carrying capacity, web gear in a color that matches your uniform.  A non-military helmet is OK.

2. No full-auto firearms.  There is absolutely *ZERO* reason for the police to *EVER* employ them:  Their only use is for suppressive fire, which is fine in a military context, but absolutely unacceptable for the police to do.  Ever.  If there isn't a bad guy in their sights, they shouldn't be pulling the trigger, and there is one, a semi-auto will be more accurate anyway.  Every farkin' bullet the police shoot needs to be an aimed shot, and full-auto doesn't allow that.

And yes, that includes if the "bad guys" have full auto.

3.   Give the asswipes with scoped rifles a pair of binoculars or a spotting scope, and make them use them for normal observation instead of the scope on their rifles.  There is no reason for a police officer to be pointing a rifle at people who aren't an immediate threat.  THIS IS A BASIC GUN SAFETY RULE:  Never point a gun at something you aren't willing to destroy.  Observation just doesn't cut it, there are safer alternatives.

4.  I can see a case for a major metropolitan area for having a couple of bullet-proof vehicles.  And by a couple, I mean two.  But the policy of giving out MRAPs to every podunk county sheriffs department that asks is ridiculous.  My rural county of 65,000 people has *FOUR* MRAPs, two uparmored Humvees, and a former Brinks armored car.

That's excessive and unnecessary in a county that has a crime rate way lower than the national average.  And the justification the sheriff used?

"We live in the North Country, it's very common for people to have high-powered hunting rifles."

Kind of stupid reasoning for a county that has a murder rate about the same as England*.  It's completely unnecessary.

5.   Forbid the shaving of heads of police officers.  I know this sounds stupid, but it's an outward sign of dangerous "groupthink".  That's why the military does it:  Historically it was to stop head lice, but they found that it's an effective psychological tool to make new recruits think and act alike.  In the context of military recruit training, it's a positive thing.  But we're talking about the police here.  Groupthink leads to poor decision making.  Have a requirement that they need at least a 1/4 inch of hair where ever it naturally grows on their head, and encourage neatly groomed "civilian" hairstyles.  Make it part of the grooming standards.  Added bonus:  They won't look like farkin' racist skinheads.

6.  No face masks that obscure what the officer looks like.  A gas mask, when using CS against a riot is one thing.  So is a clear riot face shield that still allows you to see what the officer looks like.  I've got no problem with them.  But there is no reason for an officer to wear a balaclava or other face covering.  All it does is obscure the identity of the officer.  If that officer is an undercover officer, they shouldn't be on the SWAT team in the first place. One minor exception to this rule:  for extended cold weather outdoor operations, a mask designed to keep you warm is OK.

7.  Forbid officers from using the term "civilians" when talking about people who aren't law enforcement officers.  Make them use the term "citizen" or "people" or "person".  The police are civilians also, and I can think of no better way to hammer home the idea that the aren't in the military then to make sure they don't use that term.

Really though, it boils down to a single, basic principle:  If you look like you're in the military, and you use military equipment and terminology, you're going to act like you're in the military.  Everyone else is outside your group.  You are on the defensive.  All that matters is you and your unit.

I don't think any of us want that.

On the other hand, if you look like the people you are sworn to protect and serve, you'll do a better job of protecting and serving them.


*County homicide rate is 26% that of the national average, which is 4.8 per 100,000, so county rate is 1.25 per 100,000.  England and Wales homicide rate is 1.04 per 100,000.
 
2014-08-19 04:54:26 PM

dittybopper: The police are civilians also


While I agree with your overall point that police should not be militarized, I'm afraid you've already lost on the definition of "civilian"... Every dictionary I can find includes police (and sometimes firefighters and others) along with military in the non-civilian group...
 
2014-08-19 05:21:35 PM

dittybopper: Daedalus27: dittybopper: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs supports this kind of policing:

[www.slate.com image 850x566]

I certainly do support this capability.  St. Louis County is a large county of over 1 million residents immediately outside an major city.  They should have the capability to respond to significant events that may pop up in a large urban environment.  I am not saying they should be patrolling with it or use on routine warrant service or other tasks departments tend to use them, but St. Louis County isn't some bumfark county with 2,000 people in the middle of nowhere that has one violent crime a year when Joe Bob goes on a bender.  They have a significant population that requires increased capabilities to respond to abnormal events that may require a large tactical deployment and armored capabilities to combat active shooter situations. You hope you don't need such a force but you damn sure want it when some events occur or you are scrambling to make do with substandard response that can cost lives.

I think I'll take that risk.

The odds of units like that being abused are much, much greater than the odds of them being used in a situation where more conventional police tactics are inadequate.

I'm willing to bet that the number of times innocent people, or non-violent law breakers, were unnecessarily injured or killed by such units far exceeds the number of times they actually did something useful and protective of society.

Originally, SWAT-type units were formed for the express purpose of dealing with the worst of the worst scenarios:  Hostages scenarios, major terrorist attacks, that sort of thing.  But as time wore on, and as those sorts of situations were found to be so uncommon that the units were essentially being unused, then the urge to "use them or lose them" forced them into being used for the very things you say they shouldn't be:  Stuff like routine arrest warrants, especially if the person is known to have a Raven .25 ACP pistol.

But if we *M ...


1.  Non-regular uniforms/military style fatigues serve a purpose.  They are usually a heavier material and maybe cotton that is less comfortable but safer to use if Molotov cocktails are used.  Regular patrol uniforms are more comfortable to wear but if come into contact with flame can burn more readily so it isn't a good choice in a riot situation.

2.  Police do not use full auto rifles.  They don't.  No one uses them, police, criminals, military, outside of maybe collectors.  Even the military weapons outside of the SAWs and machine guns are single fire or 3 round burst for the most part. Automatic fire is wasteful and inaccurate so hell you may even want criminals using it since after the first could rounds, you would be spraying sky. You are mistaken scary looking guns for automatic weapons.

3.  That's fine, they should leave the gun in the truck.  if needed for a specific event, they can go get it.

4. I agree, I made that point earlier.  Maybe let the county or group of counties if in a rural part of the state share a mutual aid for one or two of those vehicles.

5.  What's next, the dangerous and perverted moustaches?  What about tattoos that could be scary and intimidating?  People can choose the fashion they wear in most jobs.  Hell shaved heads are probably a safer choice in terms of if in a ground struggle it doesn't provide something for a suspect to grab.  If I had my way I would probably advocate short hair or shaved heads as a matter of safety. If it keeps you safe in the zombie apocalypse, it keeps you safe on the street.

6. What if it is cold or there is risk of fire?  Instead of face covering being the issue, mandate a state ID/badge number be required to be displayed on all uniforms.

7. Civilians, Citizens, persons, whatever.  I don't see the point and language adopted with copspeak is too far developed to be adjusting it.  I don't really think matters.

Police have always been paramilitary in their organization and mannerism.  The ranking structure, the language and jargon used by the insiders, and the natural separation that developed between members and non-members. The same could be said with fire departments yet we don't criticize the militarization of the fire department. You are not going to change that at this point and attempting to change that could be counterproductive to their effectiveness.  I am not saying changes to policy, procedure, tactics, and discipline for abuses shouldn't be implemented, but the fact is that policing and military duties naturally have a lot of crossover and overlap between members.  That is why so many military members move into policing after their time in the service. You can't change that by adopting different words or uniforms.
 
2014-08-19 06:09:04 PM
Have we reached tyranny yet?
 
2014-08-19 07:05:06 PM

dittybopper: Daedalus27: dittybopper: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs supports this kind of policing:

[www.slate.com image 850x566]

I certainly do support this capability.  St. Louis County is a large county of over 1 million residents immediately outside an major city.  They should have the capability to respond to significant events that may pop up in a large urban environment.  I am not saying they should be patrolling with it or use on routine warrant service or other tasks departments tend to use them, but St. Louis County isn't some bumfark county with 2,000 people in the middle of nowhere that has one violent crime a year when Joe Bob goes on a bender.  They have a significant population that requires increased capabilities to respond to abnormal events that may require a large tactical deployment and armored capabilities to combat active shooter situations. You hope you don't need such a force but you damn sure want it when some events occur or you are scrambling to make do with substandard response that can cost lives.

I think I'll take that risk.

The odds of units like that being abused are much, much greater than the odds of them being used in a situation where more conventional police tactics are inadequate.

I'm willing to bet that the number of times innocent people, or non-violent law breakers, were unnecessarily injured or killed by such units far exceeds the number of times they actually did something useful and protective of society.

Originally, SWAT-type units were formed for the express purpose of dealing with the worst of the worst scenarios:  Hostages scenarios, major terrorist attacks, that sort of thing.  But as time wore on, and as those sorts of situations were found to be so uncommon that the units were essentially being unused, then the urge to "use them or lose them" forced them into being used for the very things you say they shouldn't be:  Stuff like routine arrest warrants, especially if the person is known to have a Raven .25 ACP pistol.

But if we *MUST* have them, and there is a case to be made for *SMALL* units in the major cities, then here is what we need to do:

1.   Most importantly, get rid of the military style uniforms and equipment.  You wear your normal patrol uniform.  If you need extra carrying capacity, web gear in a color that matches your uniform.  A non-military helmet is OK.

2. No full-auto firearms.  There is absolutely *ZERO* reason for the police to *EVER* employ them:  Their only use is for suppressive fire, which is fine in a military context, but absolutely unacceptable for the police to do.  Ever.  If there isn't a bad guy in their sights, they shouldn't be pulling the trigger, and there is one, a semi-auto will be more accurate anyway.  Every farkin' bullet the police shoot needs to be an aimed shot, and full-auto doesn't allow that.

And yes, that includes if the "bad guys" have full auto.

3.   Give the asswipes with scoped rifles a pair of binoculars or a spotting scope, and make them use them for normal observation instead of the scope on their rifles.  There is no reason for a police officer to be pointing a rifle at people who aren't an immediate threat.  THIS IS A BASIC GUN SAFETY RULE:  Never point a gun at something you aren't willing to destroy.  Observation just doesn't cut it, there are safer alternatives.

4.  I can see a case for a major metropolitan area for having a couple of bullet-proof vehicles.  And by a couple, I mean two.  But the policy of giving out MRAPs to every podunk county sheriffs department that asks is ridiculous.  My rural county of 65,000 people has *FOUR* MRAPs, two uparmored Humvees, and a former Brinks armored car.

That's excessive and unnecessary in a county that has a crime rate way lower than the national average.  And the justification the sheriff used?

"We live in the North Country, it's very common for people to have high-powered hunting rifles."

Kind of stupid reasoning for a county that has a murder rate about the same as England*.  It's completely unnecessary.

5.   Forbid the shaving of heads of police officers.  I know this sounds stupid, but it's an outward sign of dangerous "groupthink".  That's why the military does it:  Historically it was to stop head lice, but they found that it's an effective psychological tool to make new recruits think and act alike.  In the context of military recruit training, it's a positive thing.  But we're talking about the police here.  Groupthink leads to poor decision making.  Have a requirement that they need at least a 1/4 inch of hair where ever it naturally grows on their head, and encourage neatly groomed "civilian" hairstyles.  Make it part of the grooming standards.  Added bonus:  They won't look like farkin' racist skinheads.

6.  No face masks that obscure what the officer looks like.  A gas mask, when using CS against a riot is one thing.  So is a clear riot face shield that still allows you to see what the officer looks like.  I've got no problem with them.  But there is no reason for an officer to wear a balaclava or other face covering.  All it does is obscure the identity of the officer.  If that officer is an undercover officer, they shouldn't be on the SWAT team in the first place. One minor exception to this rule:  for extended cold weather outdoor operations, a mask designed to keep you warm is OK.

7.  Forbid officers from using the term "civilians" when talking about people who aren't law enforcement officers.  Make them use the term "citizen" or "people" or "person".  The police are civilians also, and I can think of no better way to hammer home the idea that the aren't in the military then to make sure they don't use that term.

Really though, it boils down to a single, basic principle:  If you look like you're in the military, and you use military equipment and terminology, you're going to act like you're in the military.  Everyone else is outside your group.  You are on the defensive.  All that matters is you and your unit.

I don't think any of us want that.

On the other hand, if you look like the people you are sworn to protect and serve, you'll do a better job of protecting and serving them.


*County homicide rate is 26% that of the national average, which is 4.8 per 100,000, so county rate is 1.25 per 100,000.  England and Wales homicide rate is 1.04 per 100,000.


You know, I sometimes agree with you and other times I don't... But I don't think I've ever read a thread that I agreed with you in more than this one. I think you're spot on in pretty much every post in this thread.
 
2014-08-19 09:16:37 PM
As someone who lives within a 20 mile radius of this incident, it's stupid ass cops with stupid ass equipment, who think that it's ok to toss a stupid ass flash bang in a house without doing normal investigation as to what's going on and almost killing an innocent baby, this is unforgivable.

/second amendment is good.
//cops with military equipment is bad.
///due diligence as far as investigation is even better.
 
2014-08-19 09:53:48 PM
"You can pay me now, or pay me later."*

*(Fram oil filter commercial, if you don't get the reference).
 
2014-08-19 10:00:13 PM
Who needs investigations when we have APCs and an abundance of ammuniton.

I think maybe we have a funding problem in America, and we're just giving too much money to the cops.
 
2014-08-19 11:09:11 PM

mongbiohazard: You know, I sometimes agree with you and other times I don't... But I don't think I've ever read a thread that I agreed with you in more than this one. I think you're spot on in pretty much every post in this thread.


Dammit, now I'm going to have to work harder to offend you just to balance things out.

Bastard.

But on the serious side, I know a few police officers.  The distaffbopper and I actually watch the daughter of one of the local police detectives.  And he's a police officer like I describe:  No buzzcut, but a shorter, neat hairstyle that doesn't scream "I'll rip out your eyes and *SKULLFARK* you, Maggot!".  Sense of humor.  Decent guy.  Hell, he brought a huge box of his now adult son's old airsoft guns for the littlebopper.  Don't think he was ever in the military, and I bet he rolls his eyes at the tacticool operatingest operators.

That's the kind of guy I want in charge when bad shiat happens.  Not some steroidal skinhead Army Ranger wannabe.
 
2014-08-19 11:14:45 PM
Sue.

Any lawyer in the country would take the case.

I'm guessing the kid is deaf at a minimum, horribly maimed in all likelihood?
 
2014-08-19 11:18:43 PM

firefly212: Who needs investigations when we have APCs and an abundance of ammuniton.

I think maybe we have a funding problem in America, and we're just giving too much money to the cops.


We're not giving them too much money:   We're letting them steal it to fund themselves.

And both the Right and Left agree it's a bad thing, but no one seems able to stop it.
 
2014-08-19 11:25:30 PM

studebaker hoch: Sue.

Any lawyer in the country would take the case.

I'm guessing the kid is deaf at a minimum, horribly maimed in all likelihood?


Doesn't matter.  The county will end up paying.  The people who actually did it won't.  So they won't learn any lesson, and neither will anyone else.

What needs to happen is that the qualified immunity that the officers enjoy from civil suit for their official duties needs to be limited or stripped completely, so that the next time something like that happens, they can be sued out of their house and retirement,  pour encourager les autres.

And then stuff like this will magically stop.
 
Displayed 208 of 208 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report