The Next Waco?

[DMF]

Easier just to let the ignorant make their assumptions and continue to insist that everyone who picks away at LE is and always has been on the outside looking in.

How ironic to say that those of us who have actually been through LE training and do the job are the ignorant ones. Also, where did anyone say that everyone who criticizes LE has always "been on the outside looking in?"

Just because you don't like what others are saying doesn't mean it's automatically wrong. Also, to say that those that have done the job and been through the training are ignorant is just ridiculous. Maybe you should look up the definition of that word before throwing it around. Also, look up ironic, so you will know why I described your comment with that word.

 

[SUE ROVR]

They need to make it a felony so that you can SOS.

I am betting this alone will reduce illegal immegration to a trickle in AZ and Texas where you can use deadly force to stop a felony.

Anyone remember B-1 Bob Dornan and the fence model in the House about 10 years ago?

 

[Matt G]

2A said:

That's not the topic here. The topic is visible militarization. Not how the cops deal with each other "in-house" but how they deal with the people. How they present themselves. How force is applied, etc. And how they are guided while becoming cops. That's the point about how they are told today they are the glue of society. Not even so much shepherds as zoo-keepers.

I know a cop or two who think that "those civilians just don't understand, couldn't/wouldn't ever..."

You know what? Most cops I know smirk at that kind of cop. The rest just ignore them. There's little sense in arguing with them; they're convinced that they are above.

Here's the thing, though: they're only a tiny small fraction of the cops I know. (and as the son of a lifelong cop who works in the county I grew up in, I know a lot of cops.)

As for a growing sense of Us/Them, I'd say it's shrinking, in a lot of ways. I hear a lot of "Well back in the day, a person showed some respect to a police officer." Well, back in the day, a cop had a lot more leeway, if he wanted to arrest a disrespectful person, and then give said person a little "tuneup" on the way to the jail. I'm not saying it never happens anywhere anymore, but I've never seen it, and it's getty pretty rare. There's a reason I can't carry my dad's old sap on duty.

Classes I had to take in Academy or in-service, that I doubt were taught 35 years ago:

Community Oriented Policing
Cultural Diversity
Sexual Misconduct Awareness
Racial Profiling (that's a "Don't do it" class, not a "Do It" class. )

And I'll just bet that my Use Of Force classes were a touch more detailed, with a lot more push NOT to shoot, then it was in my dad's academy days. Remember, TN v. Garner hadn't come out yet-- cops could (and did) shoot at fleeing felons back then.
Different times.

Is it perfect now? Heck no.

Do we have a LONG way to go? You bet.

Will some citizens ALWAYS be mad at cops when cops do their jobs. Absolutely, no matter how nice they are. How do I know? Because I made 4 traffic stops this evening. I wrote 3 warnings, and all of those drivers thought I was the nicest cop in the world. The one I wrote a ticket to? She thinks I'm a bad, bad apple, and I'm rotten to the core. [shrug] Nothing I can really do to change her mind. So I gave her the most professional, courteous demeanor I could, even while it was clear she thought I probably had dined on slaughtered kittens for breakfast. That's what just about every street cop I know does. But the chasm will always exist.

My chief, a man I really respect, would have me in his office, tearing me a new orifice if I didn't treat the citizenry with respect. And if that didn't do it, he'd send me packing. That's the way it is in just about any department you'll find, because the chief answers to the City Council, who doesn't want to hear from their constituants that the City is employeeing rude thugs.

 

[stevelyn]

Ranch Rescue won't get my sympathy if they're out there being wannabe drug warriors.

Being drug warriors was not the purpose of their job. The siezed marijuana was incidental to intercepting the illegal border crossers who just happened to be carrying it across.

I think we are in agreement on the so-called failed Drug War. But if I just rounded up a group of illegals I'm holding for authorities who've trespassed on private property and they have a load of dope on them, I'm certainly going to turn the dope over to LE when the arrive. I certainly don't want to lay claim to it. I also don't want to do anything that would bring negative light on my charitable organization.

 

[JohnBT]

Some days I think I'm in a real minority around here. I appreciate police officers. Thanks folks.

I've enjoyed the fascinating discussion of whether or not Ranch Rescue should be employing a volunteer with a conviction for kidnapping/unlawful detainment, etc. I'd have to say no, they'd be better off without him and his kind.

John

 

[2nd Amendment]

But 2A, just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are ignorant.

Did not say anyone was ignorant for disagreeing, but rather for assuming things to support their disagreement. Specifically that it is always an "us vs them" discussion. It's not, though that is the angle here. Here's you a case in point now:

How ironic to say that those of us who have actually been through LE training and do the job are the ignorant ones.

One of the very assumptions I was referring to as ignorant, which I thought I had made rather clear. But regardless, I will agree it's a matter of experience. And in the end that's a big part of why I'm just tired of arguing these topics(though I'll probably get all fired up again at sometime). People will stick with their own perceptions colored by their own experiences and those of people close to them. THAT is the ultimate "us vs them" argument.

 

[sendec]

I have no clue as to what you are trying to say, so here's a picture of a rabbit with a donut on it's head:

 

[telewinz]

We have a successful Neighborhood Watch group around here. No guns or night vision required hmm...maybe this is a new cover for militia groups! A rose by anyother name.

 

[DMF]

sendec, LMAO! Thanks.

 

[El Tejon]

sendec, that's it! Send the rabbit toward the militia boys, it then hops back with the last, best hopes for freedom in hot pursuit of the donut and they are all whisked off to the pokey. Everyone wins--the police get their man, the militia boys get their donut, and the public is rid of the militia boys.

 

[2nd Amendment]

I've grown rather accustomed to you finding yourself in that position, sendec. That's ok, though. Someone has to post cute, fuzzy bunny pictures.

 

[Art Eatman]

2A commented: "That and the closing of ranks everytime the rabble dare "bash LE"."

For all: It's not a closing of ranks. It's my fed-up-ness with the backing and forthing of "You did!" "I didn't!" kindergarten stuff.

Somebody makes a point with a rational set of reasons for an opinion, I don't care what position they take on an issue. But how many times do folks take some pre-determined, knee-jerk opinion based on sketchy info from some newspaper article? And then, later, we find out from details that they yowling and howling was unwarranted? Or an isolated instance of terminal stoopididididity? And in the meantime there are pointless squabbles and examples of rudeness and discourtesy to other members?

Danged shame you can't send Valium via PM or email...

Grump.

Art

 

[Muzzleflash]

The Weavers believed that the JOOOOOZ run the world, yet they were engaged in the Jewish-wannabe religion often referred to as "messianic israel". (possibly the ultra-fringe one with the convoluted mental gymnastics holding that true israel is actually white people from england)

Note how one of them screamed out the "sacred name" Yahweh. Of course, they addressed the god who was too holy to be referred to with pagan names such as 'lord' or 'god' with lips that also spouted obscenities in times of stress. A few nuts short of a can of planters.

Hilarious. A bunch of people who believe that we Joooooz run the world (ZOG) yet they're Jew wannabes. That makes me smile.

Shame they didn't Jonestown it. Ah well, life is never perfect.

 

[tcsd1236]

That is the kind of response I'll never understand. If you have nothing to say then why say something so pointless? I don't have to give you a break. You need to educate yourself. These are the kind of things drummed into the heads of young cops at academies and training seminars. That they are a "New Class". A "Cut Above". That society hinges on them for its very existence. That "average people" can't control themselves without the constant sword of LE over their heads to maintain "discipline". It leads to the kind of attitude that is increasingly alienating police from the Citizenry to whome they SHOULD answer at all times.

Just how many police basic schools have you sat in on that you even know what you are talking about? Building esprit d'corps, trust in your fellow officers and working as a team does not equate with telling them they are a cut above the rest of society. If thats what basic schools are doing in your mind, then military basic is guilty of the same thing.

As for the original incident, usually when the subject of no-knocks come up, people start shouting about how they should have tried to nab the guy in public when he was out and about in public. Here was a prime example of why that tactic isn't a good plan to folow.

 

[Jon Coppenbarger]

Yes I see your point as getting them in puplic is not a good ideal as they get way to many witnesses and how can you control all that many different persons stories.
They are not unlike the old saying the only wistness you want left is the one left alive to tell it. so doing it in puplic might be a bad ideal.

I liked the one with that guy in Utah you know and remember they shot him while he went to get his mail out of his mail box down by the road. Rural, no witnesses.
Yeah his family a couple of years later were the one's held up in their ranch compound for allegedly trying blow up a church or something. Can not remember to save me and oh well it really does not matter once the rabbit tape starts playing full blast day and night with those spot lights.

Just guess the govt. killing a guy that did not carry a weapon down to the end of his drive to just get his mail on his snow mobil in a winter storm was reason enough to kill him.
And then his family had no right to alegidly try to start trouble a few years later so they could get the compound treatment.

We just want to know what happened and can any of you leo's provide us the stories so we can reast assurred its right and not let our minds run a muk.

It would make no sense to just start picking out qoutes and phrases from some different folks here that already posted like soem folks did to 2A.

I went threw and found alot of little they had the rights to and he was this and that and we should support them 100%. Heh I was to do that too.

And ranch rescue not having anything to do with this guy I guess you must of all missed the part where they had a legal defense fund set up for him run by the ranch rescue folks.
Why did you say they should get rid of him and do not have anything to do with him. was that so he would not have any support.
If they are still defending him and was there as it seems for each incident other than the shooing of a female friend while shopping I think that should be there choice if he is a stand up guy or not.

 

[tcsd1236]

Yes I see your point as getting them in puplic is not a good ideal as they get way to many witnesses and how can you control all that many different persons stories.

Loosen up the tinfoil. Thats not why we don't like to arrest someone out in the open; its more hazardous to the general public.

 

[CentralTexas]

In response

Been busy, but to reply to you Tamara-
You said-

Being all non-spongecakelike yourself, we can safely assume that:

1) Your dues to the NRA, GOA, JPFO, and CRPA are all paid up.
NRA,GOA,TSRA- Yes

2) That you have attended a protest or two in the last couple months.
I would have been alone, we don't even have anti-gun protests here anymore

3) That you have written and/or called all your federal, state, and local Elected Things in the last couple of months.
Every week for a month before the AWB as a matter of fact

4) That you have actively participated in the election campaigns of pro-gun candidates recently, handing out flyers, posting signs, answering phones, et cetera.
I give money to the Libertarians in lieu of time (being back in school) and
I talk to people every chance I get about RKBA

5) That you have donated money to the election funds of pro-gun candidates.
See above, also buy items from groups like JPFO to show others

But whether I follow your little checklist or not has nothing to do with my statement. Many on this board will just hand in their guns when the time comes. It takes guts to hang it all out or die for your beliefs. Several hundred years ago Americans did it on a regular basis, 90% of Americans aren't like that today.
CT

 

[longrifleman]

Loosen up the tinfoil. Thats not why we don't like to arrest someone out in the open; its more hazardous to the general public.

Your point is accurate for normal criminals but
'no witnesses" is accurate for politically motivated arrests. We need to know the motivations behind the arrests before deciding wether the tactics are good/bad law enforcement or JBThuggery.

There are plenty of bad guys out there, the government does'nt need to make work for itself by "ginning up" charges.

My point wasn't about framing an "inoccent" man but more along the lines of Ayn Rand's quote about having soo many laws on the books that everyone is guilty of something, and the govt can wait until it is to their best advantage to decide to arrest whoever.

Before the conspiracy nut charge is leveled (again, I think) follow this scenario: a call from someone high up in the Justice Dept to FBI Headquarters- a call from FBI in Wash. to the Special Agent in Charge of the approiate office- SAC calls in 2-6 agents who are opposed to Ranch Rescue et al for whatever reason (I can think of several) and says domestic terrorists, sic 'em. Political problems for the establishment are discredited and arrested. If they fight back and are killed so much the better. Doing it in public and shooting maybe innocent bystanders is incompentent. That is the only thing that makes me think it isn't this scenario. I hope the Fibbies aren't that stupid.

Conspiracy? No. The type of bs that govts have been doing since govt was invented? Yep. At least political dissenters and opponents of current policy aren't crucified along Pennsylvania Ave. We're making progress!

 

[The Real Mad Max]

Its amazing the amount of bandwidth that is taken up here in defense of miscreants, criminals, felons and thugs...

And the offense taken towards LEOs.

An upside down world exists here.

 

[CentralTexas]

Hmmmmmm

"Its amazing the amount of bandwidth that is taken up here in defense of miscreants, criminals, felons and thugs..."

Almost as bad as the amount taken up with the attitude "The world is perfect ,anything that happens at the hands of officials of the govt. must have deserved it"
CT

 

[confinedbythecurtain]

Amen Cosmoline!

 

[The Real Mad Max]

"The world is perfect ,anything that happens at the hands of officials of the govt. must have deserved it"

Well, now, thats a leap of conclusions. But now that you mentioned it, thats probably pretty true. I'd bet the percentages hover around 98% get what they got coming.

 

[Old Dog]

fascinating thread ...

Maybe we should pause a moment to summarize ...
-- Law enforcement: bad, cops in this country are taught they are a class above private citizens.
-- Government: conniving govt' employees in federal agencies have lots of time on their hands to target small-time bad guys who are probably just misunderstood do-gooders protecting our borders because the big bad government is too screwed up to do it right ...
--- Federal agents: look for every chance to mobilize all regional assets (no matter the expense) toward the target, to frame, capture or (preferably) kill (without witnesses) the aforementioned small-time suspected offender ...
--- Benefit of the doubt must always be given to the misunderstood victim of law enforcement, because he/she was undoubtedly framed prior to being murdered in cold blood with no due process.
--- Benefit of the doubt must never be given to agents of the federal government or local law enforcement, since they are taught at the academy that they are a class above private citizens and enjoy conspiring against the poor, misunderstood citizens ...
--- You are ignorant if you actually believe that most law enforcement personnel or federal government employees/agents in this country are hard-working decent people who respect the rights of private citizens.
I think this thread kinda turned into us vs. them somewhere along the line ...

 

[The Real Mad Max]

I think this thread kinda turned into us vs. them somewhere along the line ...

Yes. An unfortunate and reoccuring theme here...

 

[longrifleman]

I'd bet the percentages hover around 98% get what they got coming.

Small consolation if you are in the other 2%.

Also, the larger point isn't that most people arrested didn't do something against the law, or even something bad (not necessarily the same thing). The point is that it is possible and even easy to use the power of the law to attack political dissidents, whatever the type of challenge to the existing govt.

Most people here have expressed disagreement with the current policy on (lack of) guarding the borders. The people who run things don't care what we think. As long as it is just some grumbling we are no threat, and we will be ignored. Anyone who seriously trys to change things is a threat to the established order. Ranch Rescue et al are a visible challenge to the authority of the govt and the established order. Even without the immigration question that is enough to get them targeted for surveillance at least. If they become a serious threat they will be attacked. The LEO's probably won't like the word attacked, and I understand why. If the primary reason they are being arrested is political the word is appropriate.

Are all the people associated with Ranch Rescue going to be saints? Unlikely. That doesn't mean that the primary reason for govt interest in them isn't political.