You Wear the Badge

J

Jeff White

New member
Instead of jumping in on the 300 new ATF agents thread, I think I'll start a new one.

Folks, one of the stated goals of our enemies, HCI, VPC etc. has been to drive a wedge between law enforcement and the NRA and law abiding gun owners and LEOs. They have publically stated that. From the looks of the above mentioned thread and a couple others I've seen, they are succeeding.

I've worn a uniform all of my adult life. I've been in the Army for nearly 25 years and have been a fully sworn reserve LEO for the past 14 years.

I'm going to relate some tough judgement calls I've made in the past 14 years and bear in mind I only work about 60-120 hours per month. Full time LEOs deal with this on a daily basis. You can flame me if you think I made the wrong call, but I'd like you to tell me what YOU would have done.

Situation 1: You are called to a domestic disturbance in a mobile home park. Upon arrival, you find two families going at it over a fight their children had. You and the other officer separate the fueding parties. You are invited into one of the mobile homes to talk with the father of one of the children. He is drunk, and on the verge of being combative. As you are talking with him and trying to calm him down, you notice a nice display cabinet full of firearms. After temporarily calming the situation you leave. Back at the station you are entering the disposition into the computer. Do you make an entry noting the presence of weapons in the house?

Isn't that gun registration...even on a small scale? I did make a note that there were firearms in the house. I did it for the safety of any other officers who would have to respond to a domestic at that location. Given the subjects alcohol abuse and temper it was a safety issue. What would you do.

Situation 2: You are on patrol, state law where you work requires that all firearms be unloaded and cased while being transported in a motor vehicle recent legislation makes any weapons violation involving a firearm a felony. A pickup with out of state plates pull into traffic in front of you. In the gunrack in the rear window rides an uncased Remington 700 with a nice scope. What do you do?

I stopped the pickup. Advised the driver of the state law and assisted him in wrapping the rifle in a blanket and stowing it behind the seat. Could have made a nice felony arrest, seized the rifle. Could have ignored it altogether, let it be another officer's problem...but maybe the other officer would have made the arrest.

Situation 3: Another officer on the shift has made a small drug arrest out of a traffic stop. The kid with the dope decides to "work" the charges off. He goes to his suppliers house and buys some more, he goes in with your marked money and returns with more dope. You go to the judge and he issues a search warrant. The guy he bought from is a real dirt bag, has a record of battery to police officers and is known to posses weapons. He lives with his elderly mother.

How do you serve the search warrant and not endanger your officers, the elderly mother, or the suspect? No knock dynamic entry in the hopes of securing everything before you startle mom into a heart attack? Walk up to the door and ask for entry?

We used an officer he knew to get him to the porch on a ruse about some other activity, once he was on the porch, three officers went in the back door, weapons drawn but held down against their thighs to keep from startling mom and secured the room where the drugs were.

I won't even try to defend the actions of some agencies. There are bad LEOs just like there are bad doctors, lawyers and computer programmers.

I'd like everyone who really thinks that all law enforcement is the enemy to think about how they'd handle those situations.

I'm sure very few people know how thin a line there is between a free state and a police state better then the police. Police make calls like those above on a daily basis. For the most part they don't want to put anyone in jail that doesn't belong there. I think that the majority of LEOs I know wish something would be done to hold those people responsible for Ruby Ridge, Waco and all of the other bad operations accountable.

Wear the badge for a while...at that level you don't make policy or Supreme Court decisions...you just live with all of that and try to do the best you can.
Jeff
 
Isn't it irrelevant that Cops have hard jobs when it comes to criticizing LE methods that one feels are unconstitutional?

Cop jobs are undeniably hard. You deal with a lot of sh*t and have to follow rules that are contrary to civil liberties because of upper management dictates using legal tools that never-the-less should be unConstitutional in the opinion of many people who value freedom.

1) Enter all facts.

2) All weapons laws are nConstitutional,
but would cya as you did.

3) No knock warrants are unConstitutional. And a bad idea when innocents are in the dwelling to be searched any way. People generally leave there dwellings some time.

LE is not necessarily an enemy, but neither a friend. Unfortunately we have to play a game of exchanging civil liberties for the sake of 2nd Ammendment support. It is not an easy or tasteful game, but one that is unfortunately somewhat necessary.
 
Jeff-
Thanks much. This is such a difficult issue to be succinct about. You've done it well by example.

Your examples proves not that LEO's are wearing white hats or black hats, but that they are us. Some cut corners in their lives; some display absulute disregard for our liberties. But none should be called to task for the abuses of all those in their "class".

To all (LEO and Other Civilians)-
Choose your friends and enemies carefully. When you begin to broad brush, you play right into the Anti's hands... the choices become subservience or insurrection. Surely there is a middle ground. Neither the media nor the forces that would split us wishes that we come together to explore our Common Ground. That's why they try to split Hunter from liberterian and LEO from NonLEO.

Those who have come to TFL: Do you really believe that your fellow Members are the enemy? Why do you think they're here? Think!
Rich

[This message has been edited by Rich Lucibella (edited July 08, 1999).]
 
Jeff:

I too would like to say thank you for the post :) The job of an LEO is not one I would like to have. There is good and there is bad. The type of job one has does not change the ratio by much.

To answer your question. I think the situations you mentioned above were handled correctly.

Jon...
 
Ok I'll wear it for a while--not long, as I don't want your job.

Scenario 1) No, I don't register the fact of firearm ownership into the computer as the person didn't get combative--being on the verge and being are wholly different. Had he been the type to become combative--he would have already pulled a firearm from his cabinet and shot someone with it. Number one on my mind is he had the means by which to prove himself to be incapable of responsible firearms ownership, and didn't. One additional point. In Colorado, that notation in the computer would keep this person from being able to get a FFL(a copy of the application has to go to Chief LEO in his area to be signed--to see if they know of any reason for denial, whomever checks the computer notes the entry and no license) and there would be a good chance he'd also fail the CBI's "insta-check" meaning no more guns from dealers. Kinda a stiff penalty for being drunk in him own home.

Scenario 2) No change, you did good. Thanks.

Scenario 3) I can't see as to how anyone would have a problem with what was done--assuming there was no doubt about his being a drug dealer. The elderly mother has a son conducting a drug operation form her home--I think she is going to know about it, and probably expects to be "raided". I might be a little more harsh than others, but I have zero tolerance for drug dealers.

99.9% of all cops (I'm not sure when all this LEO stuff started) are good, honest, tolerant people just trying to do thier job--like everyone else. The .01%, however, have the abilty to smear the rest far more easily than most other professions because they have been granted a position of authority.

When authority is wielded--it had better be justified. Who is to say what's justified--the constitution, and when authority oversteps it's bounds, the founding fathers gave us the power to correct that situation, with the Second Amendment.

Just my thoughts, and keep up the good work.
 
I can appreciate the problems that the police face. I spent a couple of years in the Military Police. I worked in corrections and did some street work as well. It was a tough job because we always found ourselves caught between doing the right thing, using common sense while upholding the law, and dealing with officers that were always playing CYA.

I decided that I did not want to play that game when I returned to civilian life. I enjoyed the work but I was hesitant to place myself in the situation where a supervisor or politician would compromise my safety for political reasons.

The one thing that I know is true. There is an element of us vs them. Its stronger in some officers than in others. There is a "police state" state of mind. The desire to have control over others. And the willingness to abuse the power. I believe we are headed in that direction. When we cease to be a nation of laws and become subject to the arbitrary decisions of men then we are headed towards a police state in fact.
That is the problem we face today. The laws are poorly written; subject to interpretation; and we are left to the discetion of political hacks all the way from the local chief that owes his job to the politicians to the judges.
 
Lucas,
The computer entry was into the department's CAD system. Just a local notation that there were weapons in the home. Not accessible by other agencies. It just amounts to a caution given out to other officers who might be dispatched to that location. Wouldn't affect his IL FOID card or anything like that.
Jeff
 
Jeff,

Bravo.

Lucas,

Consider for a moment that the Anti's try to paint all gun owners as the .01% that are criminals as well. Do you think that is appropriate??

------------------
-Essayons
 
When I see blatant abuses like Waco occur, my blood boils. Everyone wearing a uniform and badge is a potential enemy, not to be trusted.
Then I'll see examples from the other end of the spectrum and I'll think to myself, "these guys sure have to put up with a lot of crap", and acknowledge that we obviously don't pay them enough for what they have to do.
I've seen segments on that Fox show, "Wildest Police Videos", where I would have probably shot some of those perps they're chasing on the spot!
As Rob and others point out, the vast majority of LEOS are decent folks who don't deserve our suspicion or animosity.
 
Rob:

No, to paint any group(ie. LEO's, gun owners) as the BAD .01% is wrong, and inappropriate. If I gave that impression, my mistake. What I was trying to express is that there are going to be BAD in any group, and LEO's (since they have been granted an authority over others) really need to avoid the Us vs Them attitude that Paul mentioned.

The same holds true for gun-owners, we should be willing to set good examples of firearms ownership, help those who seek help with firearms, and act responsibly--everything this forum helps to promote.
 
This is what LEAA was organized for, unfortunately the leadership is as politically ignorant and uninspired as NRA who helped form them, (surprise, surprise!). Still, with a little support, they can make a difference. www.leaa.org I THINK!
 
acckkk..grrrr..aackkkkkkkkk..mmmmmmm...ackkkkkk

Rangerco,

The leadeship of the LEAA (and the staff especially) are some of the most knowledgable people on the issue of firearms that are working in DC. The small staff is dedicated 100% to our cause and the cause of all LEOs... Justice and Freedom being right up there at the Tipity Top.

The LEAA has had one pet bill that they wrote 7 years ago that they finally got before the house of Representatives a few weeks ago. The measure was supported by over 88% of the House. They are not politically ignorant and they are definitely not uninspired.

I have worked right there with them in Washington and know of what I speak. In fact, I am so impressed with the LEAA that I am running for a spot on their board of directors this year.

Your vote would be appreciated.

-Rob
LEAA Life Member

------------------
-Essayons
 
Every Leo I've met with one or two exceptions is on my side. I frequent two LEO only ranges just to talk.. and I KNOW I don't want their job. But for the life of me I don't understand why LEO's "lump" people into groups - just like people "lump" LEOs into groups. I made the mistake of bringing up the situation in Washington DC when LEO's "sprayed" bullets into a community after they shot rifles at a shotgun-only range. I thought it was funny - the guy I was talking with "went off." He thought I was putting him and all LEO's down as a bunch of beer-drinking dummies.....Oh well. I do know that HCI and others efffectively use the divide and conquer to their advantage. We gun owners are so damn independent, we take every opportunity to divide ourselves without HCI's help. It will be our downfall! (unless something changes.) My 2c's...
 
Jeff - Bravo! I think you did the right thing in each situation. I'm currently on my way to starting a career in law enforcement, and men like you are the reason why.

I'll do my best to be as level-headed, fair, and wise as you.
 
Over several decades I have found cops to be pretty much good guys. I see a cop and I think "friend". But cops are people, just like the rest of us, and you can't judge the whole barrel by one or two bad apples.

My area of worry is typified by a conversation with a buddy who's been in ATF for 20+ years. It was right after Waco, and he was as disgusted as I. He agreed that the initial raid was set up to be a media event, since the budget hearing were scheduled for a week or two afterwards.

Anyway, his comment was that when he went on board with ATF, most agents were street-cops with experience. They liked the better hours, pay and benefits. He then pointed at the bus-boy in the restaurant and said (to the effect), "Now, we take kids like that, run them through FLETC, give them a badge and an attitude, and turn them loose."

I have a Natl Park Service buddy who went to FLETC. I asked him about any "us vs. them" on the part of the instructors. Simply put, "Yup."

This, to me, is a trend which I find very disturbing. And, we've all heard and read of federal arrogance toward local law enforcement. Is that getting worse?

The feds now have EPA people and Ag people certified thru FLETC, with badges and guns. Duh?

Obviously, I distinguish between the feds and everybody else...

FWIW, Art
 
good post Jeff,

...as far indicating that the individual had firearms, I like to think I would have been concerned about who might have to come out later., just recording the fact that there are firearms present is not to me the same as putting down make mdl and serial nbr and claiber, that is reqistration to me, you know like the ncis background chk.......I would have more concern if the computer data base was accessible to outside agencys.

I experienced a similiar situation as the guy in the pickup and the event was handled the same way......a good common sense selective enforcement of the law.....

I dont care for dynamic entrys, although ya'll's technique was interesting, the guy has to leave sometime does he not-----that probably ties up to many resources to wait for him to leave, although if you survailled the residence could you not round up more of his customers prior to making the bust and then bust him when he leaves......just rambling, I no little about what it takes...fubsy.
 
Fusby,
Most agencies, even big ones, don't have the manpower to sit on suspects for days at a time. Also, you want to serve a warrant on a drug house quickly, before the product is either sold or moved.

Benton was right in the other thread, for every dynamic entry made probably 100 warrants are served by officers knocking at the door presenting the warrant and asking for entry. You should understand that most quantities of drugs in these places are flushable. So slightly different tactics have to be used or you don't get the contraband.

No knock warrants are hard to get where I work and rightfully so. We have to satisfy the judge that to knock and announce would result in extra danger to us or the suspect or that there is a very good chance that the contraband will be destroyed or disposed of.

There is a sensitivity towards the over-militarization of law enforcement within the community. The Criminal Justice Department of the University of Eastern Kentucky published a study a few months back entitled "Too Much SWAT". It's a hard call to make. You have to balance everyones safety with freedom and public opinion.

Law enforcement agencies are still run by the civilians that they serve. How many have expressed their outrage at the abuses that have occurred to their elected officials? How many have written a letter to the editor of the local paper?

When the bad apples aren't weeded out, fired and prosecuted it makes everyone else look bad. I know we don't seem to have much effect at the federal level, but I can assure you that your opinion matters at the state and local level.

Jeff
 
These are all tough calls for our LE friends (and they are our friends) by and large. Two things: an acquaintance from Texas had just moved out here to California (So. Cal beach area). Driving through a downtown beach city in his pickup with Texas plates, his hunting rifle was nestled in the rifle rack in full view. He was pulled over by one of our community's finest. The officer informed him of the law here with respect to transport of firearms and acted similarly to you. He did not confiscate the rifle. Second, an armed woman, holed up in her vehicle in a parking lot in Vernon, was being approached by officers suspecting her of shooting another woman at a Mc Donalds across the street. After a number of hours in a standoff, the woman motioned through her sunroof for officers to advance. As they did, a SWAT sniper (and that's the correct term) observed her raise her hand with a gun in it pointing it toward the advancing officers. In an instant and from 100 yards out he popped her head right through the windshield. He had to make a nanosecond decision. What do you guys think? I think he's a damn good shot.

------------------
Safe shooting - PKAY
 
The jist of this stuff is that a lot of folks think that no knock warrants (or the knock and wait few seconds bullsh*t) and the dynamic entries made during the serving of those warrants are just plain unConstitutional and wrong.

Now I have a lot of other complaints abouts tactics and laws that routinely on a daily basis violate civil rights, but the problem above seems to be the biggest one. Untill it goes away? I don't know. I guess "Pound Sand!" :(
 
Jeff White--"No knock warrants are hard to get..." NO, NO, NO, NO, NO. Under the current Supreme Court rulings they are not hard to get. The Supreme Court in Richards v. Wisconsin decided in 1997 took efforts to stem the RAMPANT RAMPANT abuse of no knock warrants. But left the door wide open. Maybe your local judge is cautious about issuing no knock warrants. BUT THE LAW ALLOWS THEM TO BE OBTAINED WITH LITTLE JUSTIFICATION. Please, it is not what you do, or what "flys" where you work, it is what the LAW ALLOWS. The Bill of Rights was not written to leave it to the discretion of LEOs OR JUDGES. You know, or should know, the two sentences that need to be put in the application/affidavit for the warrant to ensure that a no knock is warrant is signed.
The defense of LEOs is always we don't abuse it, but we need the right to... But we don't want you to have the "right to..." I would rather risk a thousand drug dealers flushing the dope down the toilet, to curtail the laws presently in effect. I would rather keep my rights as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights intact (what is left of them) and let some criminals get off and make your job HARDER.

------------------
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top