Sub Guns For Hostage Rescue?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I won't second guess or monday morning quarterback the INS' tactics. Like it or not, they have a job to do and they done it. I will however say that if I were on that tac team I wouldn't want to enter a house containing a bunch of "on a mission to become known for a cause" type political radicals without a top notch entry gun like the MP5.

If your child washed up in Cuba, how would you like it if you couldn't get it back because Cuba decided that they had the power to keep him if they want to and tied the whole deal up in their legal system for months. This is violating a right that I consider to be at least equal to RKBA! Parental right to custody of your children!!

I'm pretty sure that most, if not all of you that are crying "police state" in this case would not cry it so loudly if, in the above described scenario, a Cuban tac team went in, armed with MP5's, grenade launchers, or even fully auto .50BMG's and took your son/daughter and put them alive and breathing back in your arms.



------------------
R6...aka...Chris
 
Hey Mikul,

Why bust the guy's balls for doing his job?

What you're advocating is harassment, pure and simple. Why? You think everyone has the independent wealth to say "I think I'll support this job function today, but I won't support that one tomorrow, even though it will cost me my job. I can handle it, I'm rich..."

You want to let someone know how you feel? How about Janet Reno? She's the one who authorized the exercise.
 
Would the MP5 of today be the equivalent of the Roman short-sword of yesterday?
biggrin.gif


------------------
John/az

"The middle of the road between the extremes of good and evil, is evil. When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
 
Mike,

I can't decide if that was sarcasm or not.

What kind of bastard works at a "job" with a want ad that reads: "WANTED: Men willing to run into a building full of unarmed civilians, and point a machine gun at them in order to take a child from people who love him, and who is in no physical danger whatsoever."

I'm not rich, but I knew enough to quit my job working for the military because I could't support their efforts in good conscience.

I don't know what it's like to be rich, but I sure know what it's like to have morals. If we all act according to who pays us the most, then who is left to do what's right? It's obvious from your post where your loyalty rests.

You're right about Reno, but I could support her effort if it was performed without such an obvious overuse of force. That man was out of order, and should be seriously repremanded if not brought up on criminal charges. That is true even if Reno doesn't do it herself. If she doesn't, then she's an accessory.
 
Having had some experience with MP5s, I would say that it is excellent for the job. As to propriety of the action, that family was essentially holding the kid hostage and thumbing their noses at everyone who didn't share their political grudges and milking the situation for all it was worth. The Bortac officer with the MP5 sure as hell didn't want to be there, but he was stuck with the job. The whole thing was obscene--but who orchestrated the situation?

------------------
 
BMiricle, Do us a favor and quit spamming TFL, I have seen the EXACT same post on several threads. Not trying to flame you, but you could try to be more original.
 
I really do see the point of having people armed (with MP5's even) in this situation, but it seems that having soldiers secure the house, and then having a counselor/hostage negotiator/politician go in with two lightly armed (pistols) men to bring the boy out would have been preferable. A foot soldier with a rifle shouldn't have gotten near the kid. It was unnecessary and dangerous for many reasons including putting the soldier at risk (the man holding Elian could have gone for the gun while he handed the kid over).

It would've taken more than 5 minutes, but it would have been 10x less traumatic and dangerous.

If I had custody of a child, and his mother wouldn't return him to me, do you think the government would bring me up on charges if I went to her house with a rifle to get the kid back? They set an excellent example of how they think the situation should be handled.
 
Did anyone else notice the religious overtones that the crowd outside were beginning to place on the child?

I was watching some news channel interviewing the crowd, and the number of people referring to Elian as a saint or messiah was beginning to make me nervous.

Anyone get a read on how big the crowd outside the house averaged?

We've all seen what tensions after soccer games can do. And the soccer fans generally have one of two emotions. Victory or Anger.

The crowd outside the house in Miami was incredibly complex. Some hated Castro. Some loved the kid. Politics. Religion. Pride. Hate. Maternal Instincts. Honor. Anger. Love. Shame. Patriotism.

Any one of those emotions has been responsible for killing thousands of people throughout history. And there's a crowd full of not just one of these emotions, but all of them and more.

Would a couple of plainclothed agents walking up to the house to remove Elian in the bright noon sunshine, in front of the crowd at it's largest, have been enough to change the crowd into an aggressive mob? Especially if the Miami family added some histrionics?

Good thing we didn't have to find out.

LawDog
 
No, Mikul, I was NOT being sarcastic.

You "job description" could also be rewritten this way...

Wanted: Men and women with desire in maintaining law and order in an increasingly hostile environment in which you are viewed as a parriah.

Must be willing to accept derision from all sides of the public who will second guess your every action.

Must be able to ignore all insults hurled at you, your family, and your ancestry, as well as all items hurled at you, including bottles, bricks, rocks, feeces, etc.

Must be able to put all feelings aside when same individual who previously questioned your ancestry and threw bottle at you is now screaming for you to save him, his family, his television, his car, his standard of living, and his right to view you as a scum sucking pig.

Must be willing to be shot and killed in the line of duty while protecting the Constitutional rights of said above individual.

Must be willing to have family be willing to have you be shot and killed in the line of duty while protecting the Constitutional rights of said above individual.

Must be willing to accept rate of divorce that is roughly 15 times the national average, depression and mental health illness rate that is 10 times the national average, heart attack, cancer, stroke, high blood pressure and ulcer rates that are significantly above the national average.

Attractive average starting salary approximately $21,000 a year, on average.

Any questions?

Now, the question of morals...

Whose morals are to be used as the pattern here?

Your morals? My morals? The officer's morals? A convenient set of "community standard" morals?

You have your morals. I have my morals. The officer in question has HIS morals. All three sets certainly differ in fundamental ways... So, whose are more right?

The officer may well believe that his orders, and his subsequent actions, were well within the scope of law and the situation (as do I).


[This message has been edited by Mike Irwin (edited April 23, 2000).]
 
Mike:

Actions within the scope of the law? Then where was the court order?

The INS doesn't need one? Oh, so we should just follow whatever the governmental official says is the law on this day, and if you don't like it, tough, we've got the goons with the MP-5's.

As for the agents in the raid, per your arguements, their justification is "I vas chust followink orders." I'm sorry, using Federal agents to forcefully resolve an unadjudicated custody dispute (and terrorize a young boy and unarmed civilians) that should have been handled in a state court is unacceptable!


[This message has been edited by JimR (edited April 23, 2000).]
 
So would anyone have preferred shotguns instead of an MP5? Ya use what you need to to control the situation. It was a case in point on the intimidation value of superior firepower .

Here's my 2cent off-thread rant: I feel real sad it came to this, but it's very clear to me that this is a political pissing contest, there is little real concern for the kid. While on one hand, there was plenty of room for escallation and other tactics, I think the time had come - the Miami relatives were feeding on the situation, the crowd was getting wierder & weirder, and the kid should have gone home to his father as soon as soon as he was rested and able back in November. He belongs with his father.

I'm also sick and tired all these 'refugees' who come here for asylum turning around and making their political problems into problems for us (and I include everyone from these friggin' Cubans to the Islamic wankers to the IRA buttholes, and so on). It's your country and your problem, YOU fix it, and stay the hell home until you do.

End of rant.
M2

Oh yeah, I thank God there were no casualties.

[This message has been edited by Mike in VA (edited April 23, 2000).]
 
One can't trust much on the news without much backup investigation but supposedly, the
publicity hound Great Uncle told the Feds that you better not come in here as we don't just have cameras in here and someone might get hurt.

If this so-called protector of Elian actually said this - then overwhelming force was appropriate and it worked.

Would you prefer a hand to hand battle, or a barricaded siege?

The family could have turned the kid over as soon as the court said that they couldn't leave the country until the proceedings were over.

They didn't and if they did mention armed resistance - tough.

Let's see if they take money for a TV movie
as was suggested to be in the works.
 
Whether or not the boy stays here, or goes back to live in a Cuban "reeducation camp", is no concern of mine. My concern is the use of military weapons and tactics on US Citizens! These weapons and tactics are designed to kill - not protect and serve the Citizens of this great nation! I am greatly disheartened by those who see no evil in using these tactics on free Citizens. These people are not soldiers of enemy nations, they are Americans, and should not be bullied by a Federal Agency, just because that Agency has greater firepower. This is suppose to be a country of law, yet Federal Agencies break the law with impunity. These actions should have everyone, even those in law enforcement and the military in an uproar! When we make exceptions for these tactics, then we are not far from a police state.

I'm also very surprised that no one commented on the local SWAT team members pointing sub-guns at the local high school kids. Doesn't this upset anyone but me? Am I out of touch? I'm sure every one here gets very upset if they are swept at the range or gun shop. Yet it's OK for LEOs to sweep kids with sub-guns? Why? Because they're LEOs? How many "accidental" police shootings are there in one year? Are these practice raids worth ONE kid getting killed?

From some of the replies, I get the distinct impression that some of the LEOs and military personnel on these boards are starting to believe the lies, that their lives are somehow more valuable then the Citizens they are paid to "protect and serve". That their survival outweighs the survival of the Citizens. Is it any wonder that many don't trust ANYONE in uniform?

To those who support these actions, may I pose one question? How would Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Samuel Adams, or any of the other tens of thousands of patriots who sacrificed all for freedom, have reacted to the events in Miami yesterday morning? Their reaction would have been one of total and complete horror!
 
Unlike military personnel, the BP agents were free to refuse orders which with they did not agree. Let's not confuse military with civillian law enforcement.
 
I guess if the federal agents didn't need a job they could refuse orders. Ever heard of insubordination? It is grounds for immediate dismissal in any LE agency I have worked for.
 
Rainbow Six,
Instead of insubordination, how about just quitting? "Following orders" just doesn't wash: no one's responsible. Any JBT can claim innocence because he or she was just following orders. Any totalitarian bureaucrat can claim innocence because his or her hands are clean, he or she just issued the orders.

The Nuremburg trials invalidated this idea.



------------------
ALARM! ALARM! CIVILIZATION IS IN PERIL! THE BARBARIANS HAVE TAKEN THE GATES!
 
Good Evening Everyone-

Mike Irwin, Robert Foote, LawDog, & Mike in VA...outstanding input on the dynamics of this constantly-changing situation.

While I'm not a big fan of overreaching Federal authority...what the heck were these brave officers supposed to do? Go in harm's way armed with feather dusters?

We need to also be careful about saying that we're stormtrooping into the homes of "Americans" and "pointing machine guns at them."

<UL TYPE=SQUARE><LI>Most Americans that I know do not thumb their noses at the top L.E. officer in the entire country...regardless of what we think of her.

<LI>Most Americans do not immediately show their displeasure with an action by hurling objects, setting dangerous fires, and tearing apart American flags.

<LI>Most Americans do not "find" some child bobbing in the ocean in a truck inner-tube and then suddenly become a "member of the family" and attempt to hide said child from the authorities.</UL>

It's a complex situation, but there is only so long that longstanding laws and regulations can be outwardly flouted.

Regards to all,

~ Blue Jays ~
 
All I want to say is I'm glad they did it. 1. It makes Klinton and Reno look like the liars they are. 2. The kid belongs with his father. 3. Klinton now looks two faced calling for more gun control, after sending armed thugs in. 4. And make no mistake "Slick Willy" made the call and is distancing himself to let Reno shoulder it all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top