In Iraq, I raided insurgents. In Virginia, the police raided

Inkd

Active Member
My thought is it is a nicely written flowery story about how he got drunk, passed out with the door open and people called the police to tell them a home was burglarized. The cops went into the unsecured reportedly unoccupied residence and found a person sleeping there. They conducted their investigation and found there was no crime and left.

Good job on the part of the cops!

That pretty much sums it up in about three sentences.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...
Just out of curiosity, out of the 1100 citizens killed, how many were actively participating in a crime at the time the were killed?

It does not matter if any, or all, were "participating in a crime". The standard objective is use only the necessary force to take a "suspect" into custody alive, not be the judge, jury, and executioner. Many are apologists and blind supporters of the "cops can do no wrong" mantra. Calling any who question any police action as a "cop hater". Those are the people who have already lost the debate and bring nothing to the table. To pose honest questions and debate, and stand against such hostile actions of those who are supposed to be charged with "protecting and serving" is not hate. In the past, one, maybe two, peace officers, in a proper uniform, would have been sent to that apartment and while in the entrance to the bedroom doorway, would have just banged on the door to wake the individual so as to question him. If suspicious of the surroundings, ie what's in the room, maybe even unsnap their holster. But that's it. The acceptance of the action in the story reflects a total ignorance, and culpability, of those who have been completely programed and brain washed into thinking that this behavior is normal and acceptable --- People that cannot independently think for themselves. People who blindly accept and rationalize any and all laws, and actions, that blatantly go against liberty, freedom, and the Constitution. Also known as cowards.
 

tblwdc

New Member
If I may ...

It does not matter if any, or all, were "participating in a crime". The standard objective is use only the necessary force to take a "suspect" into custody alive, not be the judge, jury, and executioner. Many are apologists and blind supporters of the "cops can do no wrong" mantra. Calling any who question any police action as a "cop hater". Those are the people who have already lost the debate and bring nothing to the table. To pose honest questions and debate, and stand against such hostile actions of those who are supposed to be charged with "protecting and serving" is not hate. In the past, one, maybe two, peace officers, in a proper uniform, would have been sent to that apartment and while in the entrance to the bedroom doorway, would have just banged on the door to wake the individual so as to question him. If suspicious of the surroundings, ie what's in the room, maybe even unsnap their holster. But that's it. The acceptance of the action in the story reflects a total ignorance, and culpability, of those who have been completely programed and brain washed into thinking that this behavior is normal and acceptable --- People that cannot independently think for themselves. People who blindly accept and rationalize any and all laws, and actions, that blatantly go against liberty, freedom, and the Constitution. Also known as cowards.

That's a nice speech. I think you are right in that there are a number of people on here who blindly support the police. I don't think Inkd is one of them, as I have seen otherwise. I think there is an equal of number of people on here who blindly condemn the police and I think that is who inkd was referring to.

I don't know what time you speak of when police would send barney to the door to handle the situation, but that was probably a time where police were shooting fleeing felons in the back because it was legal. It was probably the time where the felons knew that if they shot the cop they were getting the electric chair. Those days don't exist anymore and cops are dealing with new thugs today. They are dealing with thugs who, despite knowing the cop has a gun, they will attack him. IE; Michael Brown.

It was a good speech though. Can you tell me exactly what constitutional violation occurred?
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...

Was not my intention to imply inkd was a blind supporter. Though after reading it again, I can see how it might look that way. Constitutional issue was a generalization, not this instance specific.
 

Inkd

Active Member
If I may ...

It does not matter if any, or all, were "participating in a crime". The standard objective is use only the necessary force to take a "suspect" into custody alive, not be the judge, jury, and executioner. Many are apologists and blind supporters of the "cops can do no wrong" mantra. Calling any who question any police action as a "cop hater". Those are the people who have already lost the debate and bring nothing to the table. To pose honest questions and debate, and stand against such hostile actions of those who are supposed to be charged with "protecting and serving" is not hate. In the past, one, maybe two, peace officers, in a proper uniform, would have been sent to that apartment and while in the entrance to the bedroom doorway, would have just banged on the door to wake the individual so as to question him. If suspicious of the surroundings, ie what's in the room, maybe even unsnap their holster. But that's it. The acceptance of the action in the story reflects a total ignorance, and culpability, of those who have been completely programed and brain washed into thinking that this behavior is normal and acceptable --- People that cannot independently think for themselves. People who blindly accept and rationalize any and all laws, and actions, that blatantly go against liberty, freedom, and the Constitution. Also known as cowards.

It does in fact matter. If using that as a statistic then on its face, it's accurate. Cops did in fact kill over a thousand people. But, when you break it down to people who were killed because of their actions, the stats begin to shift. It’s like saying that 50k people died in automobile accidents last year and because of that cars need to be have more safety features. Okay, on the face, that’s correct. But when you find out that 25k of them died from an accident they caused because they were driving drunk, 10k were caused by people drag racing and another 5k died from injuries sustained that would have been survivable if they had been wearing seatbelts and the other people killed were because of the street racers and drunks, all of a sudden the fact is that cars don’t need to be safer, people need to be safer.

You say the standard objective is to use only the necessary force to take a suspect into custody alive? When does that use of force escalate? There are at a minimum two people that have different objectives. The cop’s objective is to take a suspect into custody and the suspects objective is to not be taken into custody. How that whole evolution takes place is based solely on the suspects actions. Where the differences lie is that the cop has standards he is supposed to meet in taking that suspect into custody. That person not wanting to get taken into custody has no standards to worry about, no one is going to review his actions and possibly cost him his job.

When someone pulls a weapon on a policeman, they have to figure that the possibility exists they will be killed, they make that decision. When you are going against someone coming at you with a knife, machete or a gun, your goal is no longer to take that person into custody, it's to stop the threat they chose to pose to you and others.

You say in the past one or two peace officers would have been sent to the apartment. There were three patrol officers sent, hardly a "raid team". I would venture a guess they did knock on the door and I would also venture a guess that the author of this article was too drunk to hear it. Then again, maybe they didn't knock on the door? Since a call was reported of a person in an unlocked, model apartment, one that normally doesn't have a tenant in it, they already knew something wasn't normal so why would they announce their entry to someone? There was a time when most cops could handle a situation with a nightstick or a sap, those times are long gone. In my opinion, criminals have become more violent, they have less respect for the law and even less respect for human life. On a traffic stop, a cop would normally not have any reason to believe they are dealing with someone ready to act violently unless they observe something at the beginning of the stop. Going into an apartment that you know is occupied by someone, given your information, not supposed to be there, changes the scenario drastically and I think given the scenario, the cops acted appropriately.

The opinion of the actions in this story as acceptable to me come from my experiences while in the service when I searched buildings, dealt with drunks, received calls from dispatch with partial and usually incorrect information and having to draw my weapon on several people because the normal compliance measures of OC spray and Monandock PR-24 strikes were not enough to subdue the individual. If not for timely backup consisting of some rather large individuals, I may have had to shoot at least one person. If I was able to deliver head strikes with the PR-24 I may have been able to subdue him but it was against regulations so I did not. There are those pesky standards again.

I’m all up for a civil debate and will freely admit there are cops out there that should not wear the badge. But, there are others here that you cannot debate with because no matter what happens, the cop is always wrong. Those are the Monday morning cop haters I speak of. Those who never had 250lbs of pissed off human coming at you who laughed off everything you threw at them and not knowing what is more scary, knowing you may die or that you may have to kill someone.
 

littlelady

God bless the USA
It does in fact matter. If using that as a statistic then on its face, it's accurate. Cops did in fact kill over a thousand people. But, when you break it down to people who were killed because of their actions, the stats begin to shift. It’s like saying that 50k people died in automobile accidents last year and because of that cars need to be have more safety features. Okay, on the face, that’s correct. But when you find out that 25k of them died from an accident they caused because they were driving drunk, 10k were caused by people drag racing and another 5k died from injuries sustained that would have been survivable if they had been wearing seatbelts and the other people killed were because of the street racers and drunks, all of a sudden the fact is that cars don’t need to be safer, people need to be safer.

You say the standard objective is to use only the necessary force to take a suspect into custody alive? When does that use of force escalate? There are at a minimum two people that have different objectives. The cop’s objective is to take a suspect into custody and the suspects objective is to not be taken into custody. How that whole evolution takes place is based solely on the suspects actions. Where the differences lie is that the cop has standards he is supposed to meet in taking that suspect into custody. That person not wanting to get taken into custody has no standards to worry about, no one is going to review his actions and possibly cost him his job.

When someone pulls a weapon on a policeman, they have to figure that the possibility exists they will be killed, they make that decision. When you are going against someone coming at you with a knife, machete or a gun, your goal is no longer to take that person into custody, it's to stop the threat they chose to pose to you and others.

You say in the past one or two peace officers would have been sent to the apartment. There were three patrol officers sent, hardly a "raid team". I would venture a guess they did knock on the door and I would also venture a guess that the author of this article was too drunk to hear it. Then again, maybe they didn't knock on the door? Since a call was reported of a person in an unlocked, model apartment, one that normally doesn't have a tenant in it, they already knew something wasn't normal so why would they announce their entry to someone? There was a time when most cops could handle a situation with a nightstick or a sap, those times are long gone. In my opinion, criminals have become more violent, they have less respect for the law and even less respect for human life. On a traffic stop, a cop would normally not have any reason to believe they are dealing with someone ready to act violently unless they observe something at the beginning of the stop. Going into an apartment that you know is occupied by someone, given your information, not supposed to be there, changes the scenario drastically and I think given the scenario, the cops acted appropriately.

The opinion of the actions in this story as acceptable to me come from my experiences while in the service when I searched buildings, dealt with drunks, received calls from dispatch with partial and usually incorrect information and having to draw my weapon on several people because the normal compliance measures of OC spray and Monandock PR-24 strikes were not enough to subdue the individual. If not for timely backup consisting of some rather large individuals, I may have had to shoot at least one person. If I was able to deliver head strikes with the PR-24 I may have been able to subdue him but it was against regulations so I did not. There are those pesky standards again.

I’m all up for a civil debate and will freely admit there are cops out there that should not wear the badge. But, there are others here that you cannot debate with because no matter what happens, the cop is always wrong. Those are the Monday morning cop haters I speak of. Those who never had 250lbs of pissed off human coming at you who laughed off everything you threw at them and not knowing what is more scary, knowing you may die or that you may have to kill someone.

Wow! Impressive post. You are well informed. Thank you for your dedication to protect and serve. You are awesome!
 
Last edited:

Pushrod

Patriot
Inkd, I think you are spot on with your description above. One thing you did miss from the article, and a part that I have to agree with is that the police department in question's policy of rushing straight into an unknown situation. They need to do more along the lines of investigation as suggested in the article, at least in this described instance. A call to the security shack or management could have deescalated the situation and the potential for a lethal confrontation. What the officers did once entering the apartment seems correct given the situation.
 

Inkd

Active Member
Inkd, I think you are spot on with your description above. One thing you did miss from the article, and a part that I have to agree with is that the police department in question's policy of rushing straight into an unknown situation. They need to do more along the lines of investigation as suggested in the article, at least in this described instance. A call to the security shack or management could have deescalated the situation and the potential for a lethal confrontation. What the officers did once entering the apartment seems correct given the situation.

I can agree with that. I feel the same way with most of the actual raids that do happen. Unless there is a back pack nuke on the table I think a little extra recon is a good thing.

Another thing that I don't agree with in the "authors" slanted version is the reference to it being "his" apartment. It wasn't his apartment. It was a model apartment that he was put in while repairs were being made. With the title of the article and other references to it being "his" apartment, he would have you think that they beat down the door to his leased dwelling. When in fact they entered through a door to a unit that is never occupied that he left unlocked and open.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
I can agree with that. I feel the same way with most of the actual raids that do happen. Unless there is a back pack nuke on the table I think a little extra recon is a good thing.



that's the problem, Police now a days don't do more investigating, they kick the ####ing door down, shoot anybody or their dog who resists in the slightest, and sorts on facts afterwards as the bodies are carted away

Berwyn Heights is a Prime Example .... right here in MD.
 

bilbur

New Member
All I know is I didn't want to be a cop 20 years ago and I really wouldn't want to be a cop now. Not only do you have to jump in the middle of situations that could get you injured or killed but you have constantly deal will people that hate you just for wearing a uniform. I know there are cops that have itchy trigger fingers but from what I see they are few and far between. If they were all like that then there would be thousands of killings a day instead of a year. Most of the killings happen in low income neighborhoods where some of the worst people in society live. The cops that are put in those neighborhoods are usually the rookies or the cops that have messed up once already. Very few cops will volunteer to work in the most dangerous neighborhoods in the country and in some cases the world. Another fact is that in almost all shooting cases the suspect was being detained for an actual crime and I have a hard time sympathizing with a criminal. No, they didn't deserve to die because of their crimes but the best way to avoid being shot is to not commit crimes and to follow the cops instructions. I guarantee, in most cases, no one would have died if the suspect did what they were told. If they have a complaint about how they were treated then make it after it is all over. It is kind of hard to tell your side of the story if you are dead, hence the old saying about being dead right. I will agree that some cops have a chip on their shoulder but when you deal with the bottom rung of society all day and are hated by the entire community you would go to work with a chip too. The only way things will get better is if the community finally says enough is enough and goes after the criminals that are making the community the way it is. Take a look at Baltimore, the cops are scared to make any moves and the murder rate is as high as it has ever been. If people in the community show they are making an effort to clean things up than maybe they would get better cops and businesses wouldn't be afraid to build in their area. People can't just sit there and watch criminals turn there community into a war zone and expect things to change. On the other side of things police should make an effort to build relationships with the law abiding hard working people that live in those communities. Respect and trust is earned on both sides and if neither side is willing to make an effort than nothing will ever change.
 
Last edited:

tblwdc

New Member
that's the problem, Police now a days don't do more investigating, they kick the ####ing door down, shoot anybody or their dog who resists in the slightest, and sorts on facts afterwards as the bodies are carted away

Berwyn Heights is a Prime Example .... right here in MD.


Aren’t you a dramatic little princess. I’ll have to read the story again to see where the cops kicked the door in. I’m sure there are mistakes made by cops. I think I read somewhere that cops in the U.S. have over a million and a half citizen interactions per day. I would bet money there are mistakes made and in some cases corrupt cops. The only thing is, I doubt when cops do it right, that makes the news.
 

rdytogo

New Member
.... continued


THoughts

I wonder what the people told the cops. I wonder if they said "hey, we saw this drunk guy last night and he stumbled into this room". I wonder if the cops even knew there was a security shack, as that would have prompted them to meet with security to ask why they weren't doing their job. I wonder if there is a lot more to this story.

Those are my thoughts.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...

Here are some stories of "mistakes" being made by cops. 30 Reasons Why Saying “Don’t Want to Get Hurt By Cops? Don’t Break the Law” is an EPIC FAIL

"The badge and uniform are infallible in the blind eyes of those who are too afraid to question authority. Police kill, we are told, because they have to make it home to their families at night. Police only harm those guilty of a crime….if you don’t want to get shot by police, don’t break the law they say.

Such asininity is unparalleled. However, it still doesn’t stop the apologists from pasting some derivative of the Gene Wilder meme all over the internet every time a cop is caught smashing in some innocent person’s face."
 

Inkd

Active Member
If I may ...

Here are some stories of "mistakes" being made by cops. 30 Reasons Why Saying “Don’t Want to Get Hurt By Cops? Don’t Break the Law” is an EPIC FAIL

"The badge and uniform are infallible in the blind eyes of those who are too afraid to question authority. Police kill, we are told, because they have to make it home to their families at night. Police only harm those guilty of a crime….if you don’t want to get shot by police, don’t break the law they say.

Such asininity is unparalleled. However, it still doesn’t stop the apologists from pasting some derivative of the Gene Wilder meme all over the internet every time a cop is caught smashing in some innocent person’s face."

If I may...

It sounds to me like you are as bad as the apologists who see nothing wrong with anything cops do. You seem to have the mentality of quite a few others here that cops can do no right.

I would welcome a civil debate but it seems as though your mind is already made up so I will end my interaction with you on this subject.
 

Inkd

Active Member
I wonder what the people told the cops. I wonder if they said "hey, we saw this drunk guy last night and he stumbled into this room". I wonder if the cops even knew there was a security shack, as that would have prompted them to meet with security to ask why they weren't doing their job. I wonder if there is a lot more to this story.

Those are my thoughts.

There usually is much more to any story that's written from one persons vantage point. Actually, there may not be anything more to the story outside of this guy wanting to make an issue out of something that in reality is not a huge deal.
 

bilbur

New Member
If I may ...

Here are some stories of "mistakes" being made by cops. 30 Reasons Why Saying “Don’t Want to Get Hurt By Cops? Don’t Break the Law” is an EPIC FAIL

"The badge and uniform are infallible in the blind eyes of those who are too afraid to question authority. Police kill, we are told, because they have to make it home to their families at night. Police only harm those guilty of a crime….if you don’t want to get shot by police, don’t break the law they say.

Such asininity is unparalleled. However, it still doesn’t stop the apologists from pasting some derivative of the Gene Wilder meme all over the internet every time a cop is caught smashing in some innocent person’s face."

Just my opinion, every department has a bad cop and every cop will have at least one bad day. Everyone has a bad day at work from time to time and everyone knows at least one employee they work with that should not be there. When people commit crimes they increase their risk of having a confrontation with a cop. When people have a confrontation with a cop and they act like a complete lunatic or @$$ hole they increase their chances of being roughed up by a cop. When people run from cops they increase their risk of being tackled and injured by a cop. When people dig in their pockets, with or without a weapon, they increase their chances of getting shot by a cop. Have there been instances where cops overreact or shoot too soon, absolutely, it is a big country and there are bound to be instances of every scenario. However, for the most part, there is probably at least a 99.9999% chance a person will go home without being shot by a cop if they don't break the law or if they do get pulled over they are polite and do what they are asked. If you do any of those other things your chances of going home go down exponentially.
 
H

Hodr

Guest
Just wanted to add some more fuel to the fire.

I think one of the recurring issues we have on this forum is the clash of experience with cops, not based on race or socio-economic status, but based on location.

Cops in small towns (as are still somewhat prevalent in this area and certainly were the majority during most of our forum member's younger days) have a closer connection to the people they are charged to protect. They live in the same neighborhoods, go to the same churches, and their kids go to the same schools.

In most large cities the cops in general, and in bad neighborhoods in particular, are not part of the community. They don't live there and they don't associate with the people who live there except when dealing with crime & criminals.

It's not hard to figure out why a Baltimore City cop might have a different attitude when approaching a car driving erratically, or a group of young men loitering in a park, than a Cop from Leonardtown might. One of these officers sees the citizens they are policing as their opponents, the bad guys. They can't help it, it's the result of thousands of negative interactions coloring their perspective. The other sees them first as normal citizens, because these are the same people they have positive interactions with outside of work every single day. And this difference in perspective leads to a measurable difference in outcome, where the same reasonable and sane officer might behave differently in one place than he would in the other. It doesn't necessarily make him/her a "bad apple", but it does explain a lot of the disparity in our experiences.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...
It sounds to me like you are as bad as the apologists who see nothing wrong with anything cops do. You seem to have the mentality of quite a few others here that cops can do no right. I would welcome a civil debate but it seems as though your mind is already made up so I will end my interaction with you on this subject.
Not at all. I fully understand, recognize, and accept, the need for having peace officers, aka Sheriff's Deputies, State Troopers, etc. There is a systemic problem with how egregious police actions are rationalized by those that can actually effect the necessary changes to ensure those events do not happen again. From those "good cops" that remain silent (maybe out of fear) protecting those that that are the "bad cops". Those officers that actually stand up and speak out against unnecessary hostile actions only to be railroaded, threatened, or pushed off the force and not even having the backing of their chain of command (the very ones those "good cops" look to for support and leadership). The elected leaders that kowtow and do not stand and speak out. Elected leaders not speaking out because they fear how they might be perceived by the public as "anti" whatever. The "good cops" and the system, will never get the traction needed to remedy the faults because those "good cops" know there is no support. No one has their backs. It is until there is enough push-back and support for those in the system will there be reform.

There is good done, everyday, by those that truly appreciate the uniform and badge they wear and the awesome responsibility that comes with it. They are out there. By posting negative news of fellow officer's behavior, maybe it will help them to wake up, stand up, and clean up where ever they may be, as well as the citizenry and those elected to serve us.

It is quite ironic that the rules of engagement in Iraq or Afghanistan, are strictly adhered to, and if not, those that do not are quickly punished. But not here at home -- where any, and nearly all, egregious actions are quickly rationalized, accepted and forgotten.
 

bilbur

New Member
If I may ...
Not at all. I fully understand, recognize, and accept, the need for having peace officers, aka Sheriff's Deputies, State Troopers, etc. There is a systemic problem with how egregious police actions are rationalized by those that can actually effect the necessary changes to ensure those events do not happen again. From those "good cops" that remain silent (maybe out of fear) protecting those that that are the "bad cops". Those officers that actually stand up and speak out against unnecessary hostile actions only to be railroaded, threatened, or pushed off the force and not even having the backing of their chain of command (the very ones those "good cops" look to for support and leadership). The elected leaders that kowtow and do not stand and speak out. Elected leaders not speaking out because they fear how they might be perceived by the public as "anti" whatever. The "good cops" and the system, will never get the traction needed to remedy the faults because those "good cops" know there is no support. No one has their backs. It is until there is enough push-back and support for those in the system will there be reform.

There is good done, everyday, by those that truly appreciate the uniform and badge they wear and the awesome responsibility that comes with it. They are out there. By posting negative news of fellow officer's behavior, maybe it will help them to wake up, stand up, and clean up where ever they may be, as well as the citizenry and those elected to serve us.

It is quite ironic that the rules of engagement in Iraq or Afghanistan, are strictly adhered to, and if not, those that do not are quickly punished. But not here at home -- where any, and nearly all, egregious actions are quickly rationalized, accepted and forgotten.

Here is the problem, we maybe get a story about a bad cop once or twice a week. There are over 1 Million people employed by local and state law enforcement. With the current trend in reporting every little thing a police officer does wrong there still is less than 1% of the police force that is bad or incompetent. I will almost guarantee that it is the same percentage no matter what the job is. Out of every bank teller there is probably less than 1% embezzling money, out of every IT person there is probably 1% hacking networks for criminal purposes, etc... If everything they reported happened in 1 state then there would be a problem with that states police department but it isn't such a small demographic, it is the entire country. As far as I am concerned this whole thing is getting blown out of proportion, it is a series of local problems not one big global one.
 
Top