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  
•       •       •

12067 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Aug 2014 at 1:59 AM (4 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



208 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
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?
 
Displayed 50 of 208 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report