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

[Doug.38PR]

This video shows that police are even LESS qualified to carry a gun than any citizen they may complain of in their current state of arrogant thinking.

5 out of ten policemen will tell you that they are the only ones qualified to carry guns. POLICE "professionals" are always making judgements on civilians in one article and news story after another whenever there is a breaking in someones home or a carjacking, "Well we prefer that people not shoot the 'suspect' but should try to apprehend them. Or call 911 and wait for us (professionals) to get there)." Political figures say the same thing all the time on FOX, CNN and other networks when interviewed on the subject. Think of it this way. Do they let you walk into a courthouse with a gun? No. Do they let police? Yes. They trust the police because they are "qualified" but you are not. I'm not trying to be anti-cop. Nor an I trying to blanket the whole police force with this. There are a good number of good cops out there that have common sense and still think like real people. But there is a strong mentality of this arrogant among police. You can spot it easy when they approach you. They are usually arrogant and condecending and act like they know all the answers and you are a simple fool. It's a childish "I'm in power" attitude. Whereas I've encountered good cops that will walk up to you and ask questions if they have concerns like a regular person. In other words they act like we're all adults here. Whereas the former try to act like parents or children....and they are more ready to pull their guns and use them than using good judgement. This video is a good example of it. Also, remember that video in Tenessee a few years ago, when the cops pulled this family over thinking they were some kind of robbers. They had their shotguns ready and aimed with ever step they took around the car. Forced the family out on the ground shotguns still cocked and aimed at the unarmed family. The family dog was in the car barking and jumped out. This dog was not dangerous. I could see that it was a people dog that just wanted to play and was trotting all around the car with the police and family. One kid cop with his shotgun swinging all over the place from the family to the dog, shot the dog. It's a demonstration of more of that childish overkill and panic. Also, half the blame can also be placed on the incompetent dispatcher for saying that the family were robbers, it was actually some kind of confusion about the fathers wallet that was found somewhere if I remember right.

[TheeBadOne]

5 out of ten policemen will tell you that they are the only ones qualified to carry guns.

Source?

Do they let you walk into a courthouse with a gun? No. Do they let police? Yes.

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".

There are a good number of good cops out there that have common sense and still think like real people. But there is a strong mentality of this arrogant among police. You can spot it easy when they approach you. They are usually arrogant and condecending and act like they know all the answers and you are a simple fool. It's a childish "I'm in power" attitude. Whereas I've encountered good cops that will walk up to you and ask questions if they have concerns like a regular person. In other words they act like we're all adults here. Whereas the former try to act like parents or children....and they are more ready to pull their guns and use them than using good judgement. This video is a good example of it.

I think the above says a lot more about you than anything else, think about it.

Also, remember that video in Tenessee a few years ago, when the cops

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?)

[FrankDrebin]

Think of it this way. Do they let you walk into a courthouse with a gun? No. Do they let police? Yes.

I went to the Michigan Court of Appeals to support a cop who was charged, and convicted, of Second Degree Murder for hitting a high crackhead carjacking suspect in the head with his flashlight after the crackhead grabbed the cop's gun. They wouldn't let me in, in uniform, with my gun. That kind of covers both the double-standard-for cops-who-kill-in-self-defense theory AND the why-can't-we-go-into-the-courthouse-armed-when-the-cops-can complaint.....

[faraway]

Drebin...
You are quite aware that SD is a common abbreviation for self defence-especially on this forum. So the semantic implication of ignorance on my part is both unjustified and an intellectually shallow tactic on your part. In an allegedly intellectual discourse of this type, that kind of thing is little more than conceptually sticking out a tongue. Grow up.
On the civilian over reaction and the perception of the courts..OK a high profile case...Bernard Goetz. Personal experience, in a Colorado barrio (in which I lived for 5 years) a neighbor stitched a bangers car...however he was a former prison guard, so it was ignored by the authorities. However, those same authorities incarcerated a man who fired a Enfield rifle at some bangers who had driven past and pointed a weapon at him. So yes, from personal experience I am quite aware of the double standards regarding even firing a weapon.
And you know quite well that a 'civilian' who even shows a weapon, under most circumstances is usually subject to the tender attention of the LE interdiction and the courts invading their life.
And it's profoundly interesting that, at no point in your missive, did you address my concerns about what level of public distrust and contempt would be inveitably raised by an incident of this manner. Or is shooting up an inner city neighborhood considered an acceptable 'friendly fire'? If these idiots stray rounds had hit a kid, that child would have been just as dead as would have been the case with some idiot gang member discharging a weapon. Alas, I had believed that Law Enforcement was supposed to be held to a higher standard, and more aware of the consequences of their actions. Apparently not...
And finally, it's incidents and attitudes like the ones written of here, which leave me no regrets from having abandoned a career in the criminal justice system.
Moderators...might consider closing this thread, it's gone too far and is too polarized for legitimate discussions.

[ATW525]

Uh... wasn't Bernard Goetz acquitted of attempted murder?

Edit - Left out the word attempted, sorry.

[TheeBadOne]

On the civilian over reaction and the perception of the courts..OK a high profile case...Bernard Goetz. Personal experience, in a Colorado barrio (in which I lived for 5 years) a neighbor stitched a bangers car...however he was a former prison guard, so it was ignored by the authorities.

Uh... wasn't Bernard Goetz acquitted of attempted murder?

Yes, he was charged and it was a big trial. Guess I don't see where the "Ignored" part is on the behalf of "The Police"...

Buy the way, I'll skip hyperbole, personal bias, etc, and post a fact:

"Goetz, a 39-year-old electronics specialist, was acquitted of attempted murder and assault, but was convicted of criminal possession of an unlicensed weapon and spent 250 days in jail.

[ATW525]

I think you're running two examples together... Bernard Goetz and his former neighbor the ex-prison guard. The latter one is the one he said the police ignored.

I'm just not sure how Bernard Goetz fits in... he wasn't a cop... he went to trial and was acquitted of everything except possessing an illegal weapon which he spent less than 9 months incarnerated for. How does that support the double standard arguement? Heck, he wasn't even convicted on the count of possessing two other illegal firearms besides the one he used in the shooting. It doesn't sound like anybody hung him for exercising his right to self defense.

[OBIWAN]

In general...I think bad guys get what they deserve...but I also think the police handled this badly. Their tactics (lack of) posed more of a threat than the bad guy.

[FrankDrebin]

You are quite aware that SD is a common abbreviation for self defence-especially on this forum.

Actually, no I'm not, and I've never seen it used on this forum before, or if I had, just ignored it as some kind of gun guy jargon that I didn't need to know about.

As far as Goetz, I don't believe he was charged with the shooting aspect because of the first shots, but rather the "You don't look so bad, have another" coup de grace shot to the already wounded "attacker". If a cop had done that, you'd have called it an attempted execution.

However, those same authorities incarcerated a man who fired a Enfield rifle at some bangers who had driven past and pointed a weapon at him. So yes, from personal experience I am quite aware of the double standards regarding even firing a weapon.

How about posting a link for more information on that one? Not that I don't want to take your word that you're giving us all the objective facts....I believe I asked you to post 10 cases in the past half decade where a citizen was "hung or worse" for firing too many rounds in a justifed shooting. He must have been working that bolt like a madman....So far you're batting .000 because the Goetz case wasn't a justified shooting, and it wouldn't have been even if he were an off-duty cop.

[ATW525]

However, those same authorities incarcerated a man who fired a Enfield rifle at some bangers who had driven past and pointed a weapon at him. So yes, from personal experience I am quite aware of the double standards regarding even firing a weapon.

I was kind of curious on this one, too, given that an enfield rifle hasn't exactly been the choice of urban carry pieces since 1940's Europe. Having time to go fetch a rifle and come back to blast away at some gangers would indicate to me that he might not have been in immediate life threatening danger.

[Double Naught Spy]

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

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.

[InToItTRX]

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.

[USP45usp]

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

[shield20]

Hmmm...here's one I think the good guys did all right...

http://www.nbc5.com/slideshow/news/4480262/detail.html

[InToItTRX]

I agree.

[Doug.38PR]

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".

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?)

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

[TheeBadOne]

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!!

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.

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.

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.

[Bullrock]

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.

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

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...

[Bullrock]

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...

[FrankDrebin]

Besides. What exactly do you mean "Official Business"? Like their work is more important than mine or anyone elses.

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%)

Well, if he told you that, he's either just ignorant, or plain stupid. Former or current cops aren't immune to those qualities.

[Bullrock]

Does your job require any psychological testing before you're hired?

Mine didn't, thank God...

[USP45usp]

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?

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

Wayne

[Doug.38PR]

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.

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)

[faraway]

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.

[TheeBadOne]

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.

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).