The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old December 23, 2011, 03:34 PM   #51
secret_agent_man
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 25, 2011
Posts: 463
Quote:
crime has dropped so much
You think?

http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.s...is_a_batt.html

Last edited by secret_agent_man; December 23, 2011 at 03:36 PM. Reason: change link
secret_agent_man is offline  
Old December 23, 2011, 08:14 PM   #52
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 11,139
The problem with police using military equipment is that, sooner or later, they feel justified doing military type things with it.

Terminology doesn't help, either. Since the 1960s, our govt has been "at war" with something. Not someone, something, like poverty, or drugs, etc.

War is not police work. It is war, and the same rules do not apply. Blend the two, and both suffer. And that's where we are now. Our major urban areas have SWAT teams, which is fine, except that the Special part of Special Weapons And Tactics has now become Routine.

SWAT teams are used for nearly everything above routine traffic enforcement. Any resistance is met with overwhelming force. And that is pervading all levels of police work.

I can remember a time when police were not allowed to shoot people except in clear self defense, such as when shot at. I know of cases where criminals escaped arrest (temporarily) because they didn't shoot at the cops, so the cops couldn't shoot at them, and were unable to physically catch them.

Did this cost officers lives from time to time? Yes, certainly. Are we better off today, when anything less than instant obiedence when a weapon is suspected to be present, can bring a hail of bullets from police weapons?

I'm not sure.

Blame in on society, or tv, or anything you want, the fact is that police today seem more likely to shoot suspects, and shoot them more times than in the past.

Of course, they are at war with crime. Automatic weapons, helmets, body armor, they don't re-enforce that image in the minds of the police, do they?
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old December 23, 2011, 08:24 PM   #53
mpd61
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2009
Location: Central Mass
Posts: 348
Oh just stop...Please?

MTT TL Said:

[I]"On nearly all military installations the civilian police force have arrest powers."[/I]

Ahhh....NO they DO NOT!!!!!!!!!

CONGRESS PASSES DoD BILL WITHOUT ARREST AUTHORITY 12/15/2011

Chuck Canterbury, National President of the Fraternal Order of Police, was disappointed that one of the organization's top legislative priorities was not in the conference report on H.R. 1540, the "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012."

"Our provision was a victim of haste and process," Canterbury explained. "In each case where there was a provision in one version of the bill, but no corresponding provision in the other, that provision was simply removed so that the conferees could expedite the conclusion of the report. Our language appeared only in the Senate bill, and so it was removed without any real consideration by the conferees."

Statutory arrest authority for civilian law enforcement officers employed by DoD was identified as a top legislative priority of the FOP by the National Board of Trustees during the Spring 2011 meeting. This decision was later affirmed by the delegates at the FOP's Biennial Conference in Salt Lake City, Utah in August. A House bill, H.R. 324, has also been introduced.

"Civilian law enforcement officers employed by the DoD are in need of clarification with respect to the terms 'arrest' and 'apprehension'," Canterbury explained. "We helped craft language that would give the Secretary of Defense the authority to grant arrest powers to its civilian law enforcement officers and codify those powers in the statute just like the six DoD agencies whose officers already have this authority."

"It's an issue we've been working on for several years," Canterbury said. "We may not have made it over the goal line this time, but I am hopeful that we can get this change made in the Second Session."

44AMP said:

[I]"Our major urban areas have SWAT teams, which is fine, except that the Special part of Special Weapons And Tactics has now become Routine.
SWAT teams are used for nearly everything above routine traffic enforcement. Any resistance is met with overwhelming force. And that is pervading all levels of police work
"[/I]

I understand your assertion. It is NOT based in fact. SWAT is in movies and the news. It is NO WAY routine above traffic stops, or pervasive.

Last edited by mpd61; December 23, 2011 at 08:34 PM.
mpd61 is offline  
Old December 24, 2011, 02:47 PM   #54
Fishing_Cabin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 707
I can understand some of the feelings shared in this thread, but just because an agency has been loaned the use of firearms, vehicles, etc, I dont see a direct tie to the police becoming commandos or militerized. The equipment is just a tool, its how its used that matters.

Have I known of some places going full out with emergency response teams, armoured vehicles, etc? Yep. I know alot of the larger cities and the states also get the majority of what is available, but also for smaller areas, its a help as well. It all comes back to attitude, and how the leadership wants to proceed from there. Also, the process for getting the equipment usually isnt easy either. My agency has 2 winchester model 12's and 1 Colt M16A1 that are on loan to us, after a few years of trying. The shotguns are WELL worn, and the M16A1, seemed to be new. They are inventoried every year as well. I cant say that by recieving these 3 firearms that it has turned anyone I work with, or myself into a commando. Its just a tool. I'd say its better that it be used in some way then to eventually be cut up the Military.

Last edited by Fishing_Cabin; December 24, 2011 at 03:28 PM.
Fishing_Cabin is offline  
Old December 24, 2011, 04:29 PM   #55
secret_agent_man
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 25, 2011
Posts: 463


Has it come to this? Nine mm spray and pray ain't got a chance.

http://current.com/entertainment/***...d-weaponry.htm
secret_agent_man is offline  
Old December 24, 2011, 06:01 PM   #56
MTT TL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 1,791
Quote:
Ahhh....NO they DO NOT!!!!!!!!!
Do 2.

If you are talking about statutory powers than no, no one on base (including the MP's) have that power. In US v Banks the courts found that even though MPs do not have statutory power they can arrest people. Only commissioned officers can arrest people, but I am not in the mood to do so right now.

However, arresting people is part of their job (MPs and DOD cops) and they do it all the time. I said nearly all states, not all. Most states have recognized this. Example:

http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/01-1005.pdf

Not all bases are in compliance with HR 218 training requirements, therefore they are more limited. Some base commanders don't like or trust the DOD cops. I can give a laundry list of reasons for this but it varies widely from base to base.
__________________
Proxima est Mors, Malum Nullum adhibit Misericordiam
MTT TL is offline  
Old December 24, 2011, 09:05 PM   #57
mpd61
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2009
Location: Central Mass
Posts: 348
Inaccuracy in interpretation...

does NOT trump black and white US Code, DoDInsts, AR's etc...

We agree DoD Civilian cops have no statutory ARREST authority. (10 USC)
Read DoD 5500.25 and related regs. They specifically state no civilian components of DoD civilian police are to be cross sworn with state/county powers. Only certain, very rare installations that were prior approved by Secretary Level approval (Not local/regional commanders) were grandfathered. Now for an example of DoD department level policy on arrest, read AR 190-56 (Army Civilian Police Program) It specifically prohibits Army civilian police from arresting civilians. They can only "detain" and then transfer offenders to "appropriate civilian law enforcement" as soon as practical. (Like MP's) BTW Only Officers (MP's) can arrest other Military officers. The California case you cited was another perfect example of a STATE trying to recognize a class of Federal employees as legitimate "LEO's".
However, unless the federal agency agrees to accept the authority being offered by the individual state, it is meaningless...
mpd61 is offline  
Old December 26, 2011, 05:12 AM   #58
jimpeel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 11, 1999
Location: Longmont, CO, USA
Posts: 4,457
Anyone remember when this happened? As entered into the Congressional Record July 18, 1995 by Sen. Charles Grassley after it was found that the BATF had acquired 22 OV-10D military aircraft.

The furor over this acquisition caused the aircraft to be eventually returned.
Quote:
Congressional Record entry 1 of 2

---------------------------------

ATF'S PURCHASE OF 22 OV-10D AIRCRAFT (Senate - July 18, 1995)

[Page: S10188]

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, a news article in this morning's Washington Times says the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms recently purchased 22 OV-10D aircraft from the Defense Department.

These aircraft were used by the Marine Corps in the Vietnam war for close air support in combat. They were also used in Operation Desert Storm for night observation.

The aircraft are heavily weapons-capable, especially from a law-enforcement perspective. ATF says the planes have been stripped of their weapons. Their purpose, according to ATF, is for surveillance. The planes can locate people on the ground by detecting their body heat.

It's no secret that the ATF is undergoing intense public scrutiny. It has done some real bone-headed things. It has been criticized for enforcing the law while crossing the line of civil rights protections.

ATF's credibility will be even further tested the next 2 weeks when joint committee hearings are held in the other body on the Waco matter. And the Senate Judiciary Committee also will hold hearings on Waco in September.

I raise this issue today, Mr. President, because the purchase of these aircraft in the current climate might continue to feed the public's skepticism, and erode the pubic's confidence in our law enforcement agencies.

For that reason, it is incumbent upon ATF to fully disclose and fully inform the public as to the purchase of these aircraft.

First, what, specifically, will they be used for?

Second, where will they be located?

Third, what assurances are there that the planes will remain unarmed?

The sooner these questions are answered by ATF--openly and candidly--the less chance there is that the public's skepticism will grow.

Mr. President, the continued credibility of the ATF is on the line, in my judgment. At times such as these, when scrutiny is at its highest, the best strategy is to go on the offense. Spare no expense in disclosing fully and swiftly. Because full and swift disclosure is the first step in restoring credibility.

The ATF's credibility is important not just for itself, but for law enforcement in general. There is much work to do to restore the public's trust and confidence. I hope that ATF will step up to the challenge and provide the necessary assurances.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Washington Times article, written by Jerry Seper, be printed in the Record.

There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

From the Washington Times, July 18, 1995

[FROM THE WASHINGTON TIMES, JULY 18, 1995]

ATF Gets 22 Planes To Aid Surveillance

WEAPONS-CAPABLE AIRCRAFT REPAINTED

(BY JERRY SEPER)

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has obtained 22 counterinsurgency, heavy-weapons-capable military aircraft.

The 300-mph OV-10D planes--one of several designations used by the Marine Corps during the Vietnam War for gunfire and missile support of ground troops, and by the Air Force during Operation Desert Storm for night observation--have been transferred from the Defense Department to ATF.

The turboprop aircraft, which will be used for day and night surveillance support, were designed to locate people on the ground through their body heat.

When used by the military services, the planes were equipped with infrared tracking systems, ground-mapping radar, laser range-finders, gun sights and 20mm cannons.

ATF spokeswoman Susan McCarron confirmed yesterday that the agency had obtained the aircraft but noted they had been stripped of their armament. She said that nine of the OV-10Ds were operational and that the remaining 13 were being used for spare parts.

`We have nine OV-10Ds that are unarmed; they have no weapons on them,' Ms. McCarron said. `They are being used for surveillance and photography purposes. The remainder are being used for spare parts.'

Ms. McCarron said the aircraft were obtained by ATF from the Defense Department `when DOD was getting rid of them,' and that other agencies also had received some of the airplanes.

General Service Administration records show that some of the unarmed aircraft also were transferred to the Bureau of Land Management for use in survey work, while others went to the California Forestry Department for use in spotting fires and in directing ground and aerial crews in combating them.

Other models of the OV-10 also are being used by officials in Washington state for nighttime surveillance of fishing vessels suspected of overfishing the coastal waters.

The transfer of the aircraft to ATF comes at a time of heightened public skepticism and congressional scrutiny of the agency's ability to enforce the law without trampling on the rights of citizens.

The ATF's image suffered mightily in the aftermath of its 1993 raid and subsequent shootout at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, during which four agents and six Davidians were killed. It sustained another public-relations blow after it was revealed that ATF agents helped organize a whites-only `Good O' Boys Roundup' in the Tennessee hills.

Hearings of the Waco matter begin tomorrow in the House. A Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the racist trappings of the roundup is scheduled for Friday.

One Senate staffer yesterday said there was `some real interest' in the ATF's acquisition of the aircraft, and that questions `probably will be asked very soon of the agency' about the specifics of their use and locations where they have been assigned.

According to federal law enforcement sources and others, including two airline pilots who have seen and photographed the ATF planes, two of the combat-capable aircraft--known as `Broncos'--have been routed to Shawnee, Okla., where they were painted dark blue over the past month at an aircraft maintenance firm known as Business Jet Designs Inc.

Michael Pruitt, foreman at Business Jet Designs, confirmed yesterday that two of the ATF aircraft had been painted at the Shawnee site and that at least one more of the OV-10Ds `was on the way.' Mr. Pruitt said the aircraft were painted dark blue with red and white trim. The sources said the paint jobs cost the ATF about $20,000 each.

The firm's owner, Johnny Patterson, told associates last month he expected to be painting at least 12 of the ATF aircraft but was unsure whether he could move all of them fast enough through his shop. Mr. Patterson was out of town yesterday and not available for comment.

According to the sources, the ATF's OV-10Ds, recently were overhauled under the government's Service Life Extension Program and were equipped with a state-of-the-art forward-looking infrared system that allows the pilot to locate and identify targets at nights--similar to the tracking system used on the Apache advanced attack helicopter.

Designed by Rockwell International, the OV-10D originally was outfitted with two 7.62mm M-60C machine guns, each with 500 rounds of ammunition. It also was modified to carry one Sidewinder missile under each wing, Snakeye bombs, fire bombs, rocket packages and cluster bombs.

The OV-10D can carry a 20mm gun turret with 1,500 rounds of ammunition.

During the Vietnam War, two OV-10Ds were used for a variety of missions during a six-week period and flew more than 200 missions in which they were credited with killing 300 enemy troops and saving beleaguered outposts from being overrun by the communists.

[Page: S10189]
__________________
Gun Control: The premise that a woman found in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is morally superior to allowing that same woman to defend her life with a firearm.

"Science is built up with facts, as a house is with stones. But a collection of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house." - Jules Henri Poincare

"Three thousand people died on Sept. 11 because eight pilots were killed"
-- former Northwest Airlines pilot Stephen Luckey
jimpeel is online now  
Old December 26, 2011, 10:00 AM   #59
MTT TL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 1,791
Quote:
Now for an example of DoD department level policy on arrest, read AR 190-56 (Army Civilian Police Program) It specifically prohibits Army civilian police from arresting civilians.
That is the Army. There are two other branches of service. Again, it still happens. The person will be "detained" and then transferred to the civilian police as soon as practical. I would say civilians get "arrested" on most posts on average several times a week. Mostly for drunk driving and similar offenses.



The OV-10 was obsolete when it was acquired by the ATF. It was obsolete in Vietnam. Regardless the ATF does not need a fleet of planes to enforce tax code. Maybe in 1925, not 1995.
__________________
Proxima est Mors, Malum Nullum adhibit Misericordiam
MTT TL is offline  
Old December 26, 2011, 07:50 PM   #60
mpd61
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2009
Location: Central Mass
Posts: 348
MTT TL,

So...what way does this relate to "militarization" of civilian police?
mpd61 is offline  
Old December 27, 2011, 11:46 AM   #61
OuTcAsT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2006
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,167
Quote:
SWAT is in movies and the news. It is NO WAY routine above traffic stops, or pervasive.
May not be where you are, I live in a suburb of Nashville, population of our county is just shy of 120,000. A mixture of rural and urban areas, yet we have a city,and county police force that are 150 + strong combined. 2 swat teams complete with 2 APC's , and an arsenal of weapons that would look more at home on a military installation than in a police environment. Our newspapers are constantly sporting pictures, and stories of these units in action. They seem to be the tool of choice for serving most warrants these days.
__________________
WITHOUT Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech. Silence Dogood

Does not morality imply the last clear chance? - WildAlaska -
OuTcAsT is offline  
Old December 27, 2011, 08:14 PM   #62
mpd61
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2009
Location: Central Mass
Posts: 348
Outcast,
I hear ya friend. But how many traffic stops and "routine" calls do you see these guys going to?
mpd61 is offline  
Old December 29, 2011, 11:17 AM   #63
C0untZer0
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
I am concerned about the report that Police deaths are up this year - highest since 1969 (Talk about Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young).

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...-sharply-again

Quote:
Linda Moon Gregory, president of Concerns of Police Survivors, a nonprofit interest group, blamed on inadequate training and equipment.

"At a time when criminals have the latest technology and weapons, we must ensure that our peace officers are adequately equipped and protected," Gregory said in a statement.
In actuality - one of the best tools for police officers is a computer right in their sqaud car and high-speed network connections that link their computer with databses so they can instantly run plates, and licenses.

There are a lot of ways technology could help officers but there isn't the funding or the will to spend the money in those ways.

I also worry about the Brady Campaign or LCAV using their "goofy math" to coorelate officer deaths with CCW laws / increased gun sales or some such nonsense.

But anyway, there does seem to be a line of reasoning that preventing officer deaths means arming them better - like bigger better more lethal weapon systems.

It does make me angry when the Chicago Chief of Police makes statements about crime saying "we can't arrest our way out of this problem" as an indirect way of responding to calls for hiring more police.

Hiring more police as a general response to crime is one thing, but hiring more police so that officers can quikly back each other up is another thing.

Last edited by C0untZer0; December 29, 2011 at 11:31 AM.
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old December 29, 2011, 01:06 PM   #64
orangello
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2009
Posts: 566
Talking about the militarization of our police forces makes me wonder about the use of our military as a police force, as was done in Iraq to some extent. The two shouldn't be mixed so much, IMO. Military should fight wars to win, while the police forces should police the homefront within the limits established by our society. Neither force should be bound by the regulations, treaties, or agreements that bind the other, IMO.

I do feel that LEO's should be using good HP ammo regardless of the military's choice to limit themselves to ball/fmj ammunition.
orangello is offline  
Old December 29, 2011, 03:24 PM   #65
C0untZer0
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
Posse Comitatus

And a personal appeal from Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales for money:

Posse Comitatus Act
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old December 29, 2011, 03:33 PM   #66
C0untZer0
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
I think when police officers are being killed, it's easy to call for more armament. And conversely it's more difficult to arrgue that money could be spent more effectively.


Way back in 1990 the Army was working with the Border Patrol doing Ground Surveilance Radar deployments to detect smugglers / immigrants illegally crossing the Mexican border into the U.S. But there are limits to how much the military can help law enforcement. So given those limits, we see increased militarization of the police.

Given what we've read of the Mexican border and the death of Bryan Terry, and other incidents - there's no doubt in my mind that it's a war zone down there.
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old December 30, 2011, 09:30 AM   #67
MTT TL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 1,791
Quote:
So...what way does this relate to "militarization" of civilian police?
The opposite is also true. We don't need to get the military peanut butter into the civilian chocolate. It will not make a delicious snack. We have kept that door well closed since the War Between the States with a few notable exceptions for revolts and other mass civil unrest. The DOD does not statutory civilian arrest powers in any way shape or form. Give DOD cops arrest powers and you are opening the door for the military.
__________________
Proxima est Mors, Malum Nullum adhibit Misericordiam
MTT TL is offline  
Old December 31, 2011, 02:39 PM   #68
mpd61
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2009
Location: Central Mass
Posts: 348
MTT TL

I'm not trying to grind on you but there are no absolutes in this. you say:
[I] "The DOD does not statutory civilian arrest powers in any way shape or form."[/I]
Not true, NCIS, CID, AFOSI, are civilian employees of the DoD components with plenty of statutory arrest authority.

Again, there is no tangible evidence that our municipal/county/state police and sheriffs are becoming "militarized" in ANY way with the exception of a few BDU style uniforms.
mpd61 is offline  
Old December 31, 2011, 03:34 PM   #69
MTT TL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 1,791
Not sure what you mean by "plenty". Yes, civilian agents can arrest people for violations of federal law. The numbers of people you are talking about are tiny though. There are less civilian CID agents in the whole Army in the entire world than there are Civilian Guards in Texas for example. With their case load they can not even keep up with military crimes.

While NCIS may have a TV show about them combine all of the services together and you still have less than the number of cops in a small metropolitan police department.
__________________
Proxima est Mors, Malum Nullum adhibit Misericordiam
MTT TL is offline  
Old December 31, 2011, 05:32 PM   #70
Mike38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2009
Location: North Central Illinois
Posts: 1,150
Police or commandos? I believe it’s evolving into commandos. No, I fear it’s evolving into commandos. Let me tell you a true story that happened in a town near me a few years ago.

Guy that lived in the city limits of this town. Seemed he liked to collect things. Things you or I would consider junk. His junk collection spread over the years to his back yard, then the side yards, then the front yard. The town sent him multiple letters asking him to clean up his property. He didn’t. The town went to court to get a Judge to make it a court order. He still didn’t clean it up.

The County Sheriff at the time stopped by to warn the guy, he had to clean up his property. The guy told the Sheriff to go fly a kite, in not so nice of terms. He still didn’t clean it up. So, the County Sheriff, no less then five Deputies, two State Police, three or four dump trucks and an end loader paid the guy a visit. He was not home, so they cleaned up his property for him.

No thing wrong with that you say? Well, the County Sheriff and his Deputies where all clad in camouflage BDU’s and were carrying AR15’s on the guys property while over seeing the clean up process. Now this is not normal attire for County Deputies. They normally wear dark blue uniforms. Think about this. Camouflage BDU’s and AR15’s just to watch an end loader clean up some trash?

The rationality behind it all was the guy with the trash in his yard was a gun owner. That was all, he was a gun owner. Later that day the guy was pulled over by a County Deputy 20 miles from home. He was at his brother’s house visiting. The guy had an SKS rifle and 100 rounds of ammo with him. All legal, but the local media blew it up to make it look like the guy was some kind of militia kook. No charges were filed. The guy did nothing wrong. He was forced to reimburse the county for the clean up. That is all.

All of the above is true. Pictures in the local news paper of the police in BDU’s and carrying AR15’s. And my brother-in-law saw it unfold, he lives two doors down.

Police or commandos? Again I say, I believe it’s evolving into commandos. Disagree? That’s fine…..
Mike38 is offline  
Old December 31, 2011, 05:46 PM   #71
mete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2004
Location: NY State
Posts: 5,291
http://www.riverreporteronline.com/c...other-counties

Sullivan Co is in NY's Catskill Mtns and is a very rural county .What's there to terrorize ?? Note that they tell you exactly where and when they will be !! Any real terrorist will laugh at this .And more of our taxes go to waste.

Much of this type of action is driven by gov't funding , a part of Napolitano's attempt to enlarge and empower her agency the HSA !
__________________
And Watson , bring your revolver !
mete is offline  
Old December 31, 2011, 08:21 PM   #72
Conn. Trooper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 531
And if that guy with with his SKS and 100 rounds was home, and started shooting, you would want your rifle and BDU's. I have seen first hand what an SKS 7.62 will go through.

Obviously the guy in question has some mental issues.
Conn. Trooper is offline  
Old December 31, 2011, 09:41 PM   #73
MTT TL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 1,791
Quote:
No thing wrong with that you say? Well, the County Sheriff and his Deputies where all clad in camouflage BDU’s and were carrying AR15’s on the guys property while over seeing the clean up process. Now this is not normal attire for County Deputies. They normally wear dark blue uniforms. Think about this. Camouflage BDU’s and AR15’s just to watch an end loader clean up some trash?
Overkill due to paranoia? Likely. Did the trash get cleaned up legally and it was pretty much a non-event? Yep.
__________________
Proxima est Mors, Malum Nullum adhibit Misericordiam
MTT TL is offline  
Old January 1, 2012, 01:14 AM   #74
Mike38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2009
Location: North Central Illinois
Posts: 1,150
Quote:
And if that guy with with his SKS and 100 rounds was home, and started shooting, you would want your rifle and BDU's.
Really? BDU’s somehow magically make you shoot better then wearing your uniform? Or do you wear them to intimidate us commoners?
Mike38 is offline  
Old January 1, 2012, 03:21 AM   #75
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,306
Say goodnight, Gracie.
Al Norris is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14704 seconds with 9 queries