Did anyone see the video of those policemen railing that SUV with bullets yesterday?

Hopefully you're referring to the deputy you shot with and not a deputy you shot...
Click to expand...

Uh, yes, the deputy I shot with, NOT the deputy I shot. To my knowledge, I have never shot any living human.

TheeBadOne believes that the estimate of shots is misleading and apparently thinks it should be adjusted to reflect the number of shots that were aimed at the tires as those obviously were not aimed at the driver. That is all well and good, only I don't see any of the cops in the footage aiming anywhere other than the upper sections of the vehicle. Sure the left front tire was hit, but given the shooting, my guess is that was from flinch, not aimed fire, but that is my guess.

As for the cop pointing his gun at the camera folks, there is good reason to be hung up about that. What he did was 100% wrong. He had already turned and visually seen the camera folks and was telling them to get back and apparently they didn't move fast enough and so he used his gun to make his point. Apparently part was through, he realized the bonehead mistake and started gesturing with his other hand. Of course, all this followed footage of where he had his gun aimed at the windows of one building, sweeping the area for other possible threats. Scanning is good, but not how he did it. Giving directions is good, but not how he did it.
 
Look guys I don’t need to be attacked for what I said, I still stand by it. If you all will calm down I said nothing like I support what they did, I don't. I was making a comment. It seems everyone gets to make fun of every cop out their just because a small group of cops make an error in judgment. Even if you don't admit it, it makes you as people loose respect for the people that are trying very hard to keep this country safe. I don't need to hear this from any of you, sorry if I come across rude but when see a friend get shot and killed yesterday during a routine traffic stop here in Phoenix, I am not happy.

As far as police switching back to revolvers, are you trying to get me killed in the future?

I think some of you make good points with this situation, I think some of you need to spend sometime with police officers and see what the job is like before you comment on what we do, and why we do it.
 
More range time under stress is what is needed.

Other than that, at least they got the BG off the street before he had a chance to kill someone with the van while trying to run from the LEO's.

Wayne
 
Police can only walk into a courthouse with a gun where they are on Official Duty (testifying in court, delivering/receiving paperwork, etc). They can not just "drop by" for kicks, nor can they carry there "off-duty".
Click to expand...

I never go to a courthouse to just sit around and have kicks. Nobody does. I go there either for jury duty, to run title in the County Clerks office, check probate, appear in court. All OFFICIAL BUSINESS. But can I carry a gun? Nope. But as you pointed out. THE POLICE CAN!! And no it's not just one or two courthouses here and there. I go to courthouses ALL OVER THE STATE for a living and in a few others. I have never been in oen where I or anyone else even with a CHL can carry a gun like the police.

Besides. What exactly do you mean "Official Business"? Like their work is more important than mine or anyone elses. You demonstrate my point with more of that line of thinking that says that police have more important things to do or are more qualified than citizens.


Who are "The Police"/"The Cops" you keep generalizing about. (again, I think that speaks more about you than anything. Bringing up other "stories" about "The Police". Same state? Safe area? Safe Department? Same Officers?)
Click to expand...

These are not stories I'm just making up. I've encountered these types of individuals in person, people I know, on the news, and even my own CHL instructor and former police officer will tell you that here are a lot of bad cops out there and have this attitude I describe. (his estimate was 50%/50%) I've warned about this from CHL instructors and holders alike. "You never want to have to confront a police officer....even if you're in the right."

I have no axe to grind with the police nor do any of these people I know or have spoken to (granted the media at many times does....Rodney King incident for example.). And I AM NOT GENERALIZING ALL POLICEMEN OUT THERE. My CHL class while pointing out that there are A LOT of bad cops out there also pointed out that there are a lot of GOOD COPS too that like people with guns that feel you're one of the good guys and aren't looking for trouble, especially if you went through the trouble of going through the CHL class. I've told you and the rest of the forum that I have encountered plenty of good policemen that act like adults and have common sense and carry themselves well. Let me say it again: I AM NOT GENERALIZING ALL POLICE. In fact, I'd say it has more to do with our culture than it does with the police
 
I never go to a courthouse to just sit around and have kicks. Nobody does. I go there either for jury duty, to run title in the County Clerks office, check probate, appear in court. All OFFICIAL BUSINESS. But can I carry a gun? Nope. But as you pointed out. THE POLICE CAN!!
Click to expand...
Guess you're not getting it. I can't carry a gun into a court house for any of those things either.
And no it's not just one or two courthouses here and there. I go to courthouses ALL OVER THE STATE for a living and in a few others.
Click to expand...
I can't carry in any of them, either.
Besides. What exactly do you mean "Official Business"? Like their work is more important than mine or anyone elses. You demonstrate more of that line of thinking that says that police have more important things to do or are more qualified than citizens.
Click to expand...
Looks like that chip on your shoulder weighs less than a feather, just itching to be knocked off. What I have explained in simply this, The Law. I didn't draft it, I didn't vote on it, I didn't pass it, I'm not condoning it, I simply understand it and am explaining it.
If you are offended by someone simply explaining a law to you, I submit the handle of the axe is in your hand good Sir.
 
TheeBadOne

This does not mean others can not comment, it just means they can not fully understand a fluid/dynamic situation and all that goes with it.
Click to expand...
I've been in situations that I don't currently glorify as a keyboard commando. But fluid/dynamic? What does that mean? I don't think very many TFL members were at the scene. We all have various levels of experience, and expertise. We share that, and our opinions with each other. That's why this is called a forum. Keyboard Commando's is a little unfair, don't you think?

Hell, I've tried to argue with a member's opinion once with factual information. I finally gave up. That man is safe today with his opinion.... :) And that's neither good or bad...Ignorance is bliss :eek:

After all these years, reduced to being a lowly keyboard commando. :( I'm going to get up early tomorrow, and get my butt down to the Army recruiters office. I gotta sign up for the Rangers, and erase this black mark of my life... :D
 
Hey Shield

Thanks for the post. Slide shows are easier to follow. I think the good guys usually do all right. Many can agree this mess was an exception. I don't think LEO's or former LEO's should be offended. Hell, when I was a LEO I never made a mistake... :rolleyes:
 
Besides. What exactly do you mean "Official Business"? Like their work is more important than mine or anyone elses.
Click to expand...

Does your job require any psychological testing before you're hired? A background check where they actually talk to your neighbors and former employers? What kind of criminal history is it OK for you to have in your line of work?

and even my own CHL instructor and former police officer will tell you that here are a lot of bad cops out there and have this attitude I describe. (his estimate was 50%/50%)
Click to expand...

Well, if he told you that, he's either just ignorant, or plain stupid. Former or current cops aren't immune to those qualities.
 
Does your job require any psychological testing before you're hired? A background check where they actually talk to your neighbors and former employers? What kind of criminal history is it OK for you to have in your line of work?
Click to expand...

My old job had all these that I went through. So, I should be able to do what the LEO's do IMHO :D.

Wayne
 
Looks like that chip on your shoulder weighs less than a feather, just itching to be knocked off. What I have explained in simply this, The Law. I didn't draft it, I didn't vote on it, I didn't pass it, I'm not condoning it, I simply understand it and am explaining it.
Click to expand...

Okay, I was a little sarcasitc and insulting on the last posting. I apologize.

However, as to your comment, aren't the police "The Law"? Actually, I think you're starting to get my point. It's not the police themselves that are the problem. It's our culture and how the law has been set up by that culture which in turn affects the thinking of a lot of policemen and even citizens.

The axe I have to grind I guess you could say is our culture. We live in a culture that lives by slogans like "To protect and serve." A slogan you commonly see on police cars. The idea that the police are to protect you. The police were never supposed to protect anyone from crime. (the first police force didn't even appear in history until the 1850s in NYC) They are supposed to solve crime (catch the criminal). Over the past 100 years or so...more evident I think in the past 40 years though is the idea that we, as a culture, have to depend on someone else to protect us (I.E. the police). I hear this from some of my friends whenever they find out I have a CHL. a couple of them give me this funny look, "why did you get that?" they say. "Oh, guns are dangerous they can hurt someone, they won't do you any good anyway. That's why we have the police." (interestingly, some of these friends are either girls or they live in Austin....and if you live anywhere in Texas you know Austin is sort of a liberal mini California in this state, in other words something completely foreign to the rest of Texas ;) ) The rest of my friends are fellow guys that like the idea and are eager to get their own guns and CHL licenses if they don't have one already)

As I pointed out, their is the idea that guns are a dangerous thing that only certain "qualified" people (police) are able to carry and it is their job to protect us. Well this breeds the idea into Law and the law is made up of politicans (and/or judges) and police. Well this gives an enormous sense of power to those who carry out and enforce these laws and it almost gives them a sense of "us versus them." The police vs. citizens. This breeds elitism and self-importance among those who make and enforce the law (again being politians and police). THat's why you have police that don't like CHL holders or anyone else with guns, because they think they are the only ones qualified and almost are automatically an enemy of the police because they have one. Why can't I (or you in "other courthouses")carry a gun in say a courthouse? Because they don't trust me or anyone else who is not "qualified" or under their (the Law) immediate supervision and employment.
If you give anyone whether it is me, you or someone else this kind of power, they are going to start thinking just in the way they have been set up. They are going have a sense that they are more important. ANd this is what you encounter more and more as time goes on with the police getting more heavily armed and more laws passed for them to "protect us" from all the dangers of the world and even from ourselves (seat belt laws, cell phone while driving laws, etc.) When someone thinks they are qualified to do everything over everyone else they tend to become complacent and irresponsible themselves (which is why you see incidents like this video we are discussing. Which is why, and I don't have the exact statistic in front of me, there are more accidents with guns among policemen than among ordinary citizens who own guns) It's why you have people who after they get into law enforcement start to lord it over other people in some "I've got a badge, I've got power" attitude. (again, that is not speaking to all LEOs out there, but there are a good number of them de facto out there)
 
Concerning Goetz, I'm quite aware he was acquitted. However, although the state eventually had a very weak case, the excessive attacks they made via press conferences and other tactics-effectively trashed his reputation.
And they continued to do so, well after the case was resolved.
Concerning the incidents in the barrio, yes these did occur. However, not everything is published, and I no longer have access to the documentation (even if it were appropriate to post on an anonymous forum of this kind).
Concerning the incident with the Enfield...many in the barrio have a weapon placed so access is almost immediate. And poor people, will use what they can attain, during that period a SMLE was about 40-60 dollars. Jeesh, in about the same place and time, at one point the only thing I had during a period of 'armed' disputation with the local social club, was a replica percussion revolver. So mayhaps some economic bias is being shown here insofar as peoples choice in weaponry.
And not much as been said about my concerns about the type of damage in public perceptions and trust, that can arise from an incident of the type which began this rather heated thread.
As for my contributions, methinks all that can be said, has been. So, time to surf over to black powder...or even Nickolodoen...might be more peaceful.
 
It's why you have high school dropouts who after they get into law enforcement start to lord it over other people in some "I've got a badge, I've got power" attitude.
Click to expand...
confused.gif


Maybe a long time ago in some areas, but most states moved to Professional Law Enforcement quite a bit ago. Most states require some kind of College Degree (a few still have the "academy" set up, but that still racks up credits).

In my state you must have a minimum of a 2 yr LE degree, pass a written POST test (Peace Officer Standards and Training board, state board that determines what requirements are for LEO's, and it's civilian run),
then you are eligible to seek employment. If accepted at a Department, you still face, A full background check, full medical/physical/psychological testing (both a written test and actually speaking to a shrink), and that's just the state requirements. Departments often add their own requirements. (Such as a 4 year college degree, specialized skills, language, etc).
 
Yeah Bull - I give 'em the benefit of the doubt. We can read about events/watch the videos and try to figure out what we might have done different - but other then possibly hitting what we are aiming at a higher percentage ;), I don't know enough in this case to say too much more.

On my PD we had guys that were shooters, and guys that weren't. A bunch of us just loved going to the range when ever possible. And we had guys you would want by your side should something go down (usually the same guys), and guys you wouldn't. I trained, I practiced stuff, I have been in tough situations, luckily, I never had anything happen that was...definetively a life and death struggle; I liked to think I would do Ok - make all the right moves, make the good shots - but I just REALLY don't know...practice is one thing, experience is another. It is hard to 2nd guess others unless it is blatantly obvious they F'd up.

As for civilian vs LE - as a civilian I don't like that LEs get extra leeway in carrying, in federal CCW once retired, access to otherwise limited equipment. At 1st look the extra training might be a justification - but then why can't civilians get the same training? Like someone said many civilians are more serious about their training and more knowlegable about the use of firearms. Does an LE's service constitute a reason for extra rewards? It is a noble profession no doubt, but one they chose freely. I recently realized because of another thread that in the end it only makes another group, another class, in the "have and have nots". Us mere civilians are left unarmed and vulnerable, while the elites make the decisions that we can't be trusted with the means to defend ourselves.

I am not bitter that retired LEs can carry federally, or get an advantage in magazine capacity, or weapon or ammo choice - they have the clout and the means to get the proper laws passed. I just don't agree with the ones who line up with the Sara Brady groups of the world to deny "me' the same rights.
**************
So Why Do so many Americans Believe Cops Want More Gun Control
In part because that is what gun control advocates want you to believe. In their campaign to pass legislation the Brady Bill and the 1994 gun ban, for example, pro-gun control forces routinely called on cops to help make their case. Mostly big city chiefs and political appointees, (what we at LEAA like to call “photo op cops”) these few police bureaucrats have helped create a public impression that America’s cops favor gun control. (In some outrageous cases, police officers who actually opposed the legislation were forced by their superiors to appear in staged photographs as if they were solidly behind gun control!)
****************
Most cops are probably pro-gun (I think there are many things in common with alot of armed civilians that led them to LE in the 1st place).

http://www.leaa.org/Cops Versus Gun Control/copsversusguncon.html

I know when I was on the job that, besides making a difference, just like now I wanted to go home to my family at the end of the day. I am sure all of you guys and gals want the same thing - to have the right and the means to protect yourselves, your partners, and/or your loved ones. So I can't question too much other's people behavior in a situation THEY thought was lethal - and definetly VERY stressfull.
 
On my PD we had guys that were shooters, and guys that weren't. A bunch of us just loved going to the range when ever possible. And we had guys you would want by your side should something go down (usually the same guys), and guys you wouldn't.
Click to expand...

I worked with a woman who wasn't really what I would call a "shooter". The day her parter was shot and killed, she was also shot in the gut and went down. She was still able to shoot the bad guy in the back of the head at a good 10-20 yards.
 
same here.

TheBadOne.

Same goes here in MN. (per the training/education post - mostly done by department after the POST requirement)
Not sure where you are - and were you actually born in 1923?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top