Reason: Maryland's SWAT transparency bill produces its first disturbing results

[Winehole23]

4.5 SWAT Raids Per Day (http://reason.com/archives/2010/03/01/45-swat-raids-per-day)

Maryland's SWAT transparency bill produces its first disturbing results

Radley Balko (http://reason.com/people/radley-balko) | March 1, 2010


Cheye Calvo's July 2008 encounter (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/23/AR2009012302935.html) with a Prince George's County, Maryland, SWAT team is now pretty well-known: After intercepting a package of marijuana at a delivery service warehouse, police completed the delivery, in disguise, to the address on the package. That address belonged to Calvo, who also happened to be the mayor of the small Prince George’s town of Berwyn Heights. When Calvo's mother-in-law brought the package in from the porch, the SWAT team pounced, forcing their way into Calvo's home. By the time the raid was over, Calvo and his mother-in-law had been handcuffed for hours, police realized they'd made a mistake, and Calvo's two black Labradors lay dead on the floor from gunshot wounds.

As a result of this colossal yet not-unprecedented screw-up, plus Calvo's notoriety and persistence, last year Maryland became the first state in the country to make every one of its police departments issue a report on how often and for what purpose they use their SWAT teams. The first reports (http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2010-02-24/news/bal-md.hermann24feb24_1_raids-officers-part-ii-crimes) from the legislation are in, and the results are disturbing.


Over the last six months of 2009, SWAT teams were deployed 804 times in the state of Maryland, or about 4.5 times per day. In Prince George's County alone, with its 850,000 residents, a SWAT team was deployed about once per day. According to a Baltimore Sun analysis (http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/blog/2010/02/tactical_raids_common_in_area.html), 94 percent of the state's SWAT deployments were used to serve search or arrest warrants, leaving just 6 percent in response to the kinds of barricades, bank robberies, hostage takings, and emergency situations for which SWAT teams were originally intended.

Worse even than those dreary numbers is the fact that more than half of the county’s SWAT deployments were for misdemeanors and nonserious felonies. That means more than 100 times last year Prince George’s County brought state-sanctioned violence to confront people suspected of nonviolent crimes. And that's just one county in Maryland. These outrageous numbers should provide a long-overdue wake-up call to public officials about how far the pendulum has swung toward institutionalized police brutality against its citizenry, usually in the name of the drug war.



But that’s unlikely to happen, at least in Prince George's County. To this day, Sheriff Michael Jackson insists his officers did nothing wrong (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/18/AR2009111803872.html) in the Calvo raid—not the killing of the dogs, not neglecting to conduct any corroborating investigation to be sure they had the correct house, not failing to notify the Berwyn Heights police chief of the raid, not the repeated and documented instances of Jackson’s deputies playing fast and loose with the truth.


Jackson, who's now running for county executive, is incapable of shame (http://reason.com/archives/2009/10/12/failing-his-way-to-higher-offi). He has tried to block Calvo's efforts to access information about the raid at every turn. Last week, Prince George's County Circuit Judge Arthur M. Ahalt ruled that Calvo's civil rights suit against the county can go forward (http://wjz.com/local/cheye.calvo.maryland.2.1524049.html). But Jackson has been fighting to delay the discovery process in that suit until federal authorities complete their own investigation into the raid. That would likely (and conveniently) prevent Prince George's County voters from learning any embarrassing details about the raid until after the election.
But there is some good news to report here, too. The Maryland state law, as noted, is the first of its kind in the country, and will hopefully serve as a model for other states in adding some much-needed transparency to the widespread use and abuse of SWAT teams. And some Maryland legislators want to go even further. State Sen. Anthony Muse (D-Prince George's), for example, wants to require a judge's signature (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Md_-lawmakers-wants-more-oversight-of-SWAT-teams-8679773-80074757.html) before police can deploy a SWAT team. Muse has sponsored another bill that would ban the use of SWAT teams for misdemeanor offenses (http://www.wtop.com/?nid=598&sid=1873743/). The latter seems like a no-brainer, but it's already facing strong opposition from law enforcement interests. Police groups opposed the transparency bill, too.


Beyond policy changes, the Calvo raid also seems to have also sparked media and public interest in how SWAT teams are deployed in Maryland (http://reason.com/archives/2009/07/13/swat-gone-wild-in-maryland). The use of these paramilitary police units has increased dramatically over the last 30 years, by 1,000 percent or more, resulting in the drastic militarization of police. It's a trend that seems to have escaped much media and public notice, let alone informed debate about policies and oversight procedures. But since the Calvo raid in 2008, Maryland newspapers (http://www.explorehoward.com/news/15341/home-raid-leads-complaint/), TV news crews (http://wjz.com/video/[email protected]), activists, and bloggers (http://www.beckysbowieblog.com/2009/02/cheye-calvo-and-trinity-tomsic-in-post.html) have been documenting mistaken, botched, or disproportionately aggressive raids across the state.


Lawmakers tend to be wary of questioning law enforcement officials, particularly when it comes to policing tactics. They shouldn't be. If anything, the public employees who are entrusted with the power to use force, including lethal force, deserve the most scrutiny. It's unfortunate that it took a violent raid on a fellow public official for Maryland's policymakers to finally take notice of tactics that have been used on Maryland citizens for decades now. But at least these issues are finally on the table.


Lawmakers in other states should take notice. It's time to have a national discussion on the wisdom of sending phalanxes of cops dressed like soldiers into private homes in search of nonviolent and consensual crimes.

[doobs]

It sounds like Maryland's SWAT transparency law is a resounding success. Hopefully it's replicated in all 50 states.

[Marcus Bryant]

You can't have a 'War on Drugs' without militarizing law enforcement or deputizing the military.

When will torture find its way into domestic law enforcement?

[boutons_deux]

The should have tased and waterboarded the mother-in-law, obviously a drug dealer for Mexcian mafia.

America The Beautiful has never been more beautiful.

Shine on, Bright Star of Civilization.

[ChumpDumper]

What is a consensual crime?

[Winehole23]

Things like drug sales and prostitution.


A consensual crime is a public order crime (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_order_crime) that involves more than one participant, all of whom give their consent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_%28criminal%29) as willing participants in an activity that is unlawful. Legislative bodies and interest groups sometimes rationalize the criminalization of consensual activity because they feel it offends cultural norms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm_%28sociology%29), or because one of the parties to the activity is considered a "victim" despite their informed consent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informed_consent).

[ChumpDumper]

Things like drug sales and prostitution.I know, it's just a funny term.

"Let's all rob a bank."

"I give my consent to that idea."

[boutons_deux]

"Let's all rob a bank."

better:

"We have consensus to nuke Wall St and all it Banksters"

[LnGrrrR]

Where are the board conservatives on this one?

[EVAY]

Doesn't the constitutional protection against illegal "search and seizure" of property sound positively quaint in this context?

[MiamiHeat]

The constitution? lol

the degradation of this country began with the hippie movement in the 60's.

Baby boomers spitting out children with broken families, little education, etc. Led to higher crime rates, rise of widespread STD's, drug use, morally bankrupt citizens, etc.

today's generation, on the majority, don't take anything seriously.

then at the same time, they are bombarded with television and advertisements dulling up their brains, higher stress levels, etc etc

it won't be long now until the USA can't be recognized anymore from what it was.

Just wait until an american citizen terrorist succeeds at a HUGE attack on american soil, killing many many people. not just a dozen, but a thousand or more.

that's when we will see americans being tortured to gather intelligence. it's going to happen, only a matter of time.

[Winehole23]

Doesn't the constitutional protection against illegal "search and seizure" of property sound positively quaint in this context?Positively.

Sadly, the exigencies of the Cold War, the Drug War and the War on *terra*, seem to have hastened its rendezvous with eternity.

The greatest generation wagered their bodies in war for what they believed; we just want Big Daddy to protect us, and cry out from our easychairs and keyboards for bloody vengeance.

Vive la difference.

[Winehole23]

It sounds like Maryland's SWAT transparency law is a resounding success. Hopefully it's replicated in all 50 states.Did I detect a note of irony, doobs, or did you mean that sincerely?

[jack sommerset]

A couple of dogs were killed, boo freaken hoo.

[Winehole23]

The circumstances were very unfortunate.

[MiamiHeat]

A couple of dogs were killed, boo freaken hoo.

seriously dude, don't be an asshat.

do you have any pets? Do you even like animals?

[jack sommerset]

seriously dude, don't be an asshat.

do you have any pets? Do you even like animals?

I have a dog. I like animals. If my dog dies today, I will go get a new one tomorrow. My dog is spoiled and I have fun with it but it's a DOG. I wouldn't shed a tear if the police came in my house and shot her dead as long as they bought me a new one of my choice.

My dog had a tumor last year. The thing was size of a baseball. Took her to the vet, turned out she was cool but deep down inside I wished she was dying. I want a new dog, I had this one for 8-9 years now.

[MiamiHeat]

i question your emotional issues with pets, you need some sensitivity. not normal to just not give a shit about a family pet

anyway, for the rest of the normal world, we care and love our pets.

[jack sommerset]

i question your emotional issues with pets, you need some sensitivity. not normal to just not give a shit about a family pet

anyway, for the rest of the normal world, we care and love our pets.

Emotional issues? I care for the dog, I play with the dog, I even let the dog sleep in our room. At the end of the day it's a dog. Arn't you the same dude who fucked some random mexican chick in the ass at a party while claiming to love your lady. Son, you need to check the emotional meter, I'm good.

[MiamiHeat]

dude, i dont care about you

go talk to your mother if you think i care about your personal issues

you are weird, i dont give a shit, and the normal world cares about their pets

end discussion

[jack sommerset]

dude, i dont care about you

go talk to your mother if you think i care about your personal issues

you are weird, i dont give a shit, and the normal world cares about their pets

end discussion

Who said you did care about me, weirdo. You certainly did pass judgement on me. That's personal. You are giving me advice as if I need some. I thought it was weird for a man to care more about a pet than their own girlfriend. That's my opinion. Again, I care for the pet but I won't shed a tear if it dies.

[LnGrrrR]

I have a dog. I like animals. If my dog dies today, I will go get a new one tomorrow. My dog is spoiled and I have fun with it but it's a DOG. I wouldn't shed a tear if the police came in my house and shot her dead as long as they bought me a new one of my choice.

My dog had a tumor last year. The thing was size of a baseball. Took her to the vet, turned out she was cool but deep down inside I wished she was dying. I want a new dog, I had this one for 8-9 years now.

I believe you're missing the point.

Do you think that this was merely an accident, and as such, should be overlooked?

If so, then why use SWAT for even misdemeanors? Surely, a SWAT team costs more money than normal police, correct? So at the least you think you'd be mad at wasting taxpayer money.

[jack sommerset]

I believe you're missing the point.

Do you think that this was merely an accident, and as such, should be overlooked?

If so, then why use SWAT for even misdemeanors? Surely, a SWAT team costs more money than normal police, correct? So at the least you think you'd be mad at wasting taxpayer money.

I like the presence of SWAT in our communities. They fucked up this time but nobody was hurt. They can learn from that. As far as taxpayers money, I would have to know how else they are used.

[ElNono]

I like the presence of SWAT in our communities. They fucked up this time but nobody was hurt. They can learn from that. As far as taxpayers money, I would have to know how else they are used.

That's debatable. No human was physically hurt would be a more accurate description, but then again, courts have recognized for a long time psychological damage and even animal cruelty as punishable offenses.

[jack sommerset]

That's debatable. No human was physically hurt would be a more accurate description, but then again, courts have recognized for a long time psychological damage and even animal cruelty as punishable offenses.

Pussies, IMHO.

[boutons_deux]

JackShit, may a SWAT team break into your house, destroying all your exterior doors, force all your family to lie on the floor with boots on their necks, tase a few of ya, and then leave with a "my bad, wrong house. We were looking for a marijuana plant".

[jack sommerset]

JackShit, may a SWAT team break into your house, destroying all your exterior doors, force all your family to lie on the floor with boots on their necks, tase a few of ya, and then leave with a "my bad, wrong house. We were looking for a marijuana plant".

Well, it happened. No big deal.

[boutons_deux]

"No big deal."

you're a hard ass Real Man when (your beloved Big Govt) shit traumatizes to other people.

[jack sommerset]

"No big deal."

you're a hard ass Real Man when (your beloved Big Govt) shit traumatizes to other people.

Son, it's no big deal. This story will disappear under "who gives a fuck". A lawyer will get a few bones for himself, the family and all will be forgotten. The squeaky wheel gets paid in this pussy filled country.

That should make a cryass like you happy for this mistake.

[RandomGuy]

I have a dog. I like animals. If my dog dies today, I will go get a new one tomorrow. My dog is spoiled and I have fun with it but it's a DOG. I wouldn't shed a tear if the police came in my house and shot her dead as long as they bought me a new one of my choice.

My dog had a tumor last year. The thing was size of a baseball. Took her to the vet, turned out she was cool but deep down inside I wished she was dying. I want a new dog, I had this one for 8-9 years now.

Reading this post reminded me of the fact that mis-treatment of animals is one of the stronger predictors of future homicidal behavior, i.e. serial killers, etc.

I wonder if a sociopathic disregard for animals is a predictor of sociopathic behavior in general?

Anyone care to rate sommerset's posts versus this:

http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

??

[EVAY]

Reading this post reminded me of the fact that mis-treatment of animals is one of the stronger predictors of future homicidal behavior, i.e. serial killers, etc.

I wonder if a sociopathic disregard for animals is a predictor of sociopathic behavior in general?

Anyone care to rate sommerset's posts versus this:

http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

??

You know, RG, I actually clicked on your link, but decided that Jack didn't fit the profile as soon as I read the very first item, "glibness, superficial charm". Neither is present in Jack.

I htink you just have to go with 'shithead'.

[jack sommerset]

LOL. I say I care for my dog, play with my dog, even let the dog sleep in our room. I take the dog to the vet if it's not feeling well and I feed the dog better than some humans eat. Now I am being compared to a serial killer because I wouldn't shed a tear if the dog dies. Too funny!!!

[LnGrrrR]

I like the presence of SWAT in our communities. They fucked up this time but nobody was hurt. They can learn from that. As far as taxpayers money, I would have to know how else they are used.

Which would you prefer Jack?

Spending more taxpayer money on the extra security of SWAT that isn't needed in the majority of cases?

Or spending less taxpayer money and letting the lower-priced police handle the typical police work, and reserving SWAT for cases in which it is needed?

[LnGrrrR]

Well, it happened. No big deal.

Do you think that people whose homes are wrongly broken into should have some sort of recourse available to them? Or should tey just "suck it up"?

[Marcus Bryant]

jack would prefer a soldier on every street corner. What better way to protect our liberty?

Anyways, this is a clear case that what concerns "conservatives" these days is order, just like what concerns "liberals" is equality. Naturally, both get nutty as they pursue the absolute perfection of their concerns, and the country gets fucked in the process.

[jack sommerset]

Which would you prefer Jack?

Spending more taxpayer money on the extra security of SWAT that isn't needed in the majority of cases?

Or spending less taxpayer money and letting the lower-priced police handle the typical police work, and reserving SWAT for cases in which it is needed?

The 2nd.....Maybe they are doing both. Patrol and and when needed putting the SWAT gear on.

You still a happy dad?!?!

[sabar]

SWAT teams were formed under the guise of needing to combat situations typically reserved for the military. Special forces teams to handle hostage situations and heavily armed suspects.

Fast forward a few years when they all become common and you run into a problem. SWAT gear and training costs a fat wad of cash and SWAT situations almost never occur. The people cry foul and police departments start using SWAT for regular situations to save some cash. Thanks to fear mongering, you can't disband the force itself or people will whine about domestic terrorism being at our doorstep or some such non-sense.

As is usually the case, the people vote in the power that will disenfranchise them under some delusion of security. Cops are crooked and Americans are retards. Why empower the same force that already abuses its minimalistic powers? Here's a decent example for those living in San Antonio: SAPD traffic cops staking out roads with little-known rules so they can cite people for $200 tickets. You know, ordinary hard-working people literally being preyed upon by the government. People that have a clean record and pay their taxes.

I mean, why catch violent criminals when you can cite people for non-violent and non-endangering traffic misdemeanors? Why catch violent criminals when you can tear down some doors and DISCHARGE FIREARMS near innocent people?

I can stop more crime on my own without obliterating everyone's liberty.

[PixelPusher]

Reading this post reminded me of the fact that mis-treatment of animals is one of the stronger predictors of future homicidal behavior, i.e. serial killers, etc.

I wonder if a sociopathic disregard for animals is a predictor of sociopathic behavior in general?

Anyone care to rate sommerset's posts versus this:

http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

??

Sociopaths are assholes, but being an asshole doesn't necesarily make you a sociopath.

[LnGrrrR]

The 2nd.....Maybe they are doing both. Patrol and and when needed putting the SWAT gear on.

You still a happy dad?!?!

I would prefer the 2nd as well. However, it says in the article that the first case is going on instead.

And yes, I'm still a happy dad, thanks for asking! He's learning how to roll over now, and has finally stopped crying during his "tummy time" heh. He laughs and smiles alot, which is great! He can be a handful at times, but it's worth it.

[RandomGuy]

You know, RG, I actually clicked on your link, but decided that Jack didn't fit the profile as soon as I read the very first item, "glibness, superficial charm". Neither is present in Jack.

I htink you just have to go with 'shithead'.

Heh fair enough. It was a bit unfair, but it was just my knee-jerk reaction.

[word]

Arn't you the same dude who fucked some random mexican chick in the ass at a party .

I would like a link to this thread, please.

Thank you

[Winehole23]

Over the last six months of 2009, SWAT teams were deployed 804 times in the state of Maryland, or about 4.5 times per day. In Prince George's County alone, with its 850,000 residents, a SWAT team was deployed about once per day. According to a Baltimore Sun analysis (http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/blog/2010/02/tactical_raids_common_in_area.html), 94 percent of the state's SWAT deployments were used to serve search or arrest warrants, leaving just 6 percent in response to the kinds of barricades, bank robberies, hostage takings, and emergency situations for which SWAT teams were originally intended.

Worse even than those dreary numbers is the fact that more than half of the county’s SWAT deployments were for misdemeanors and nonserious felonies. That means more than 100 times last year Prince George’s County brought state-sanctioned violence to confront people suspected of nonviolent crimes. And that's just one county in Maryland. These outrageous numbers should provide a long-overdue wake-up call to public officials about how far the pendulum has swung toward institutionalized police brutality against its citizenry, usually in the name of the drug war.original post

the beat goes on: http://www.salon.com/2014/06/24/a_swat_team_blew_a_hole_in_my_2_year_old_son/

[angrydude]

Whatever happened to knocking on the door and showing a search warrant? Cops are that afraid of shootouts at every house? They aren't. They're just dicks playing soldier boy and the courts/legislatures won't stop them.

[boutons_deux]

Whatever happened to knocking on the door and showing a search warrant? Cops are that afraid of shootouts at every house? They aren't. They're just dicks playing soldier boy and the courts/legislatures won't stop them.

bullshit TV policing become bullshit real-life "policing"

[boutons_deux]

A SWAT team blew a hole in my 2-year-old son

http://media.salon.com/2014/06/boubou.jpg

the night a SWAT team broke in, looking for a small amount of drugs they thought my husband’s nephew had. Some of my kids’ toys were in the front yard, but the officers claimed they had no way of knowing children might be present. Our whole family was sleeping in the same room, one bed for us, one for the girls, and a crib.

After the SWAT team broke down the door, they threw a flashbang grenade inside. It landed in my son’s crib.

Flashbang grenades were created for soldiers to use during battle. When they explode, the noise is so loud and the flash is so bright that anyone close by is temporarily blinded and deafened. It’s been three weeks since the flashbang exploded next to my sleeping baby, and he’s still covered in burns.

There’s still a hole in his chest that exposes his ribs. At least that’s what I’ve been told; I’m afraid to look.

My husband’s nephew, the one they were looking for, wasn’t there. He doesn’t even live in that house. After breaking down the door, throwing my husband to the ground, and screaming at my children, the officers – armed with M16s – filed through the house like they were playing war. They searched for drugs and never found any.

I heard my baby wailing and asked one of the officers to let me hold him. He screamed at me to sit down and shut up and blocked my view, so I couldn’t see my son. I could see a singed crib. And I could see a pool of blood. The officers yelled at me to calm down and told me my son was fine, that he’d just lost a tooth.

It was only hours later when they finally let us drive to the hospital that we found out Bou Bou was in the intensive burn unit and that he’d been placed into a medically induced coma.

For the last three weeks, my husband and I have been sleeping at the hospital. We tell our son that we love him and we’ll never leave him behind. His car seat is still in the minivan, right where it’s always been, and we whisper to him that soon we’ll be taking him home with us.

http://www.salon.com/2014/06/24/a_swat_team_blew_a_hole_in_my_2_year_old_son/

[Winehole23]

^^^ three posts above yours.

you don't you read anything before posting, do you?

[TeyshaBlue]

Why start now?

[boutons_deux]

My versions are ALWAYS better

[boutons_deux]

Officer Friendly Is the Policeman of the Past -- Now They Look Like Navy Seals (http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/67322231/0/alternet~Hightower-Officer-Friendly-Is-the-Policeman-of-the-Past-Now-They-Look-Like-Navy-Seals)

Let's check our weaponry:

93,000 machine guns -- check!

533 planes and helicopters -- check!

180,000 magazine cartridges -- check!

44,000 night-vision goggles -- check!

432 mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles -- check!

OK, let's roll!

Only, this is not the U.S. military getting ready to head into battle in a foreign land. It's our local police departments patrolling our cities, towns and college campuses.

Remember "Officer Friendly," the beat cops who were known as "peace officers" and were counted on to uphold our domestic laws, detect and investigate crimes, and be a helpful, non-threatening presence in our communities? The friendlies have largely been transformed into militarized forces, literally armed with and garbed in war gear and indoctrinated in military psychology, rather than the ethic of community policing.
From 1776 forward, Americans have wisely opposed having soldiers do police work on our soil, but in recent years, Pentagon chiefs have teamed up with police chiefs to circumvent that prohibition. How? Simply by militarizing police departments.

Twenty years ago, Congress created the military transfer program, providing federal grants so chiefs of police and sheriffs could buy surplus firepower from the Pentagon. Through those grants, in a stunningly short time, our local police forces have become high-octane, macho-military units, possessing a large armory of Pentagon freebies ranging from 30-ton tanks to rifle silencers. For ordinary police work, they've gone from peacekeeping beats to way over-the-top SWAT team aggression that's unleashed on the citizenry tens of thousands of times a year. For example, a gung-ho Florida SWAT team raided area barbershops in 2010 to stop the horror of "barbering without a license." And masked police in Louisiana launched a military raid on a nightclub in order to perform a liquor-law inspection. These were barbers and bartenders, not al-Qaeda or the Taliban.

Militarization is a dangerous and ultimately deadly perversion of the honorable purpose of policing -- and it is out of control.

The New York Times notes that 38 states have received silencers to use in surreptitious raids.

A sheriff in a North Dakota rural county with only 11,000 people told a Times reporter that he saw no need for silencers. When it was pointed out that his department had received 40 of them from the Pentagon, he was clearly baffled, saying: "I don't recall approving them."

From Salinas, California, to Ohio State University, the Pentagon has been shipping massive amounts of surplus war equipment to our local gendarmes. This reflects a fundamental rewiring of the mindset now guiding neighborhood policing. Police chiefs today commonly send out squads brandishing heavy arms and garbed in riot gear for peaceful situations.

Recruiting videos now feature high-adrenaline clips of SWAT-team officers dressed in black, hurling flash grenades into a home, and then storming the house, firing automatic weapons. Who wants anyone recruited by that video working their neighborhood?

As a city councilman in rural Wisconsin commented when told his police were getting a 9-foot-tall armored vehicle: "Somebody has to be the first to say, 'Why are we doing this?'" The New York Times reports that the town's police chief responded that, "There's always a possibility of violence." Really? Who threatens us with such mayhem that every burg needs a war-zone armory and a commando mentality?

Astonishingly, a sheriff's spokesman in suburban Indianapolis offered this answer: Veterans. The sheriff's department needed a mine-resistant armored vehicle, he explained, to defend itself against U.S. veterans returning from the Afghanistan war. War veterans, he said, "have the ability and knowledge to build (homemade bombs) and to defeat law enforcement techniques."

That way of thinking is lame, loopy, insulting, shameful and just plain stupid. Maybe he just forgot to pack his brain when he left for work that day. But I'm afraid it's a window into the altered mindset of police chiefs and trainers.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/hightower-officer-friendly-policeman-past-now-they-look-navy-seals

[Cry Havoc]

Terrifying.

[boutons_deux]

MISTAKEN IDENTITY BRINGS ON SWAT RAID

A mistake by law enforcement put Miguel Montanez inches away from death.

Driving to his job at a metal shop in the early morning hours last July, a Hays County SWAT truck rammed the front of his BMW. Montanez dove to the floorboards when bullets began flying through his windshield.

When Montanez emerged from the car, authorities realized they had the wrong guy, according to a federal lawsuit filed in San Antonio Tuesday. Montanez turned up clean for warrants and had no criminal history. And just like that, without explanation or apology, Hays County sheriff’s deputies and San Marcos police officers released Montanez, according to the lawsuit, which names the City of San Marcos, the Hays County Sheriff’s Office and several unnamed deputies as defendants.

“It’s really crazy,” said Montanez’s Austin-based lawyer Adam Loewy. “My guy is a good guy. He was literally just driving to work.”

Loewy contends officers were looking for Montanez’s brother, who had reportedly violated a protective order by threatening an ex. “It was still nothing on the level that would require a SWAT team to come out and perform a Schwarzenegger-like raid,” Loewy said. The lawsuit claims Montanez suffered a serious back injury during the incident, requiring surgery, and states, “The actions by the Defendants constitute Government at its absolute worst.”

http://blogs.sacurrent.com/thedaily/swat-the-hell/

Driving While Mexican?

[boutons_deux]

Texas Police Hit Organic Farm With Massive SWAT Raid

A small organic farm in Arlington, Texas, was the target of a massive police action (http://intothegardenofeden.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=141&Itemid=381)last week that included aerial surveillance, a SWAT raid and a 10-hour search.

Members of the local police raiding party had a search warrant for marijuana plants, which they failed to find at the Garden of Eden farm. But farm owners and residents who live on the property told a Dallas-Ft. Worth NBC station that the real reason for the law enforcement exercise appears to have been code enforcement. The police seized "17 blackberry bushes, 15 okra plants, 14 tomatillo plants ... native grasses and sunflowers," after holding residents inside at gunpoint for at least a half-hour, property owner
Shellie Smith said in a statement. The raid lasted about 10 hours, she said.

Local authorities had cited the Garden of Eden in recent weeks for code violations, including

"grass that was too tall,

bushes growing too close to the street,

a couch and

piano in the yard,

chopped wood that was not properly stacked,

a piece of siding that was missing from the side of the house,

and generally unclean premises," Smith's statement said.

She said the police didn't produce a warrant until two hours after the raid began, and officers shielded their name tags so they couldn't be identified.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/15/texas-swat-team-conducts-_n_3764951.html

[boutons_deux]

more on the police/army state

The Pentagon Funds "Terror Studies" to Dissect and Neutralize Dissenters

Since the meltdown of 2008, U.S. universities have collaborated with the Pentagon to study dynamics of social movements, worldwide. The goal of “terrorism studies” is “to find possible vectors of resistance, which are to be identified and eradicated, like a disease.” The Minerva Initiative, like NSA spying, sees the entire planet as “enemy territory.”

The U.S. Department of Defense is immersed in studies about...people like you. The Pentagon wants to know why folks who don’t themselves engage in violence to overthrow the prevailing order become, what the military calls, “supporters of political violence.” And by that they mean, everyone who opposes U.S military policy in the world, or the repressive policies of U.S. allies and proxies, or who opposes the racially repressive U.S. criminal justice system, or who wants to push the One Percent off their economic and political pedestals so they can’t lord it over the rest of us. (I’m sure you recognize yourself somewhere in that list.)

The Pentagon calls this new field of research “terrorism studies,” which is designed to augment and inform their so-called War on Terror. Through their Minerva Research Initiative (http://minerva.dtic.mil/funded.html), the military has commissioned U.S. universities to help it figure out how to deal with dissatisfied and, therefore, dangerous populations all around the world, including the United States.

The Minerva Initiative was the subject of an article in The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/jun/12/pentagon-mass-civil-breakdown) newspaper by Dr. Nafeez Ahmed, an academic who studies international security issues. The Initiative seeks to sharpen the U.S. military’s “warfighter-relevant insights” into what makes people tick, and get ticked off at power structures, in regions “of strategic importance to the U.S.” Since the U.S. is an empire seeking global hegemony, and sees the whole world as strategic, the Minerva program’s areas of interest involve – everybody on the planet.

Total War Against the Planet

The Minerva project paid Cornell University researchers to find out when social movements reach a “critical mass” of people – a “tipping point” at which they become a threat to the powers-that-be. In the language of “terrorism studies,” the human beings involved in these social movements are “contagions,” as in vectors of disease . Neutralizing them becomes a job for “warfighters.”

The University of Washington is studying “large scale movements involving more than 1,000 participants” in 58 countries, to see how these folks kept their movements going.

So, now you know why U.S. intelligence agencies are tapping the telephones and Internet communications of virtually the entire population of the planet. They are mapping every conceivable human network, sifting through the myriad patterns of human association to find possible vectors of resistance, which are to be identified and eradicated, like a disease. American military and intelligence enlisted academics to study the dynamics of "the 2011 Egyptian revolution, the 2011 Russian elections, the 2012 Nigerian fuel subsidy crisis and the 2013 Gazi park protests in Turkey" – all with the aim of preventing similar “contagions” from spreading.

The United States military sees itself as engaged in a total war against the entirety of planet Earth: all of its people, its social movements and dynamics, are enemy territory, including the people of the United States.

When American rulers say they are defending U.S. national security interests against all potential enemies, what they really mean is they are defending the prevailing capitalist order against any social movement that might oppose it, anywhere on Earth. They want to put the hole planet on lockdown, and have enlisted U.S. universities in their global fascist project.

http://www.alternet.org/education/pentagon-funds-terror-studies-dissect-and-neutralize-dissenters

[TDMVPDPOY]

down here they trying to pass a new law, kill a cop u get 30yrs to life

but they dont have tough laws for corrupt cops, trigger happy cops...

[Winehole23]

turns out, there's a way to manage bad perceptions arising from public transparency -- claim immunity from open records requests.


As part of the American Civil Liberties Union’s recent report on police militarization (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/06/24/new-aclu-report-takes-a-snapshot-of-police-militarization-in-the-united-states/), the Massachusetts chapter of the organization sent open records requests to SWAT teams across that state. It received an interesting response.


As it turns out, a number of SWAT teams in the Bay State are operated by what are called law enforcement councils, or LECs. These LECs are funded by several police agencies in a given geographic area and overseen by an executive board, which is usually made up of police chiefs from member police departments. In 2012, for example, the Tewksbury Police Department paid about $4,600 (http://www.tewksbury.info/Pages/TewksburyMA_Manager/budgets/FY2012%20Budget/police.pdf) in annual membership dues to the North Eastern Massachusetts Law Enforcement Council (http://www.nemlec.com/index.htm), or NEMLEC. (See page 36 of linked PDF.) That LEC has about 50 member agencies. In addition to operating a regional SWAT team, the LECs also facilitate technology and information sharing and oversee other specialized units, such as crime scene investigators and computer crime specialists.


Some of these LECs have also apparently incorporated as 501(c)(3) organizations. And it’s here that we run into problems. According to the ACLU, the LECs are claiming that the 501(c)(3) status means that they’re private corporations, not government agencies. And therefore, they say they’re immune from open records requests. Let’s be clear. These agencies oversee police activities. They employ cops who carry guns, wear badges, collect paychecks provided by taxpayers and have the power to detain, arrest, injure and kill. They operate SWAT teams, which conduct raids on private residences. And yet they say that because they’ve incorporated, they’re immune to Massachusetts open records laws. The state’s residents aren’t permitted to know how often the SWAT teams are used, what they’re used for, what sort of training they get or who they’re primarily used against.http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/06/26/massachusetts-swat-teams-claim-theyre-private-corporations-immune-from-open-records-laws/

[boutons_deux]

Senators Pushing Legislation Aimed At Reducing The Abuse Of The Most-Used FOIA Exemption

If anything useful has been redacted from documents obtained with by a FOIA request, chances are the b(5) exemption (https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140327/14203026715/foia-exemption-b5-means-never-having-to-let-redaction-opportunity-slip.shtml) has been invoked. Theoretically narrow in scope, the exemption has expanded to cover everything from a historical recounting of the CIA's involvement in the Bay of Pigs (http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB450/) to someone's hand-scrawled commentary ("What a bunch of crap! (https://i.imgur.com/76GWi6H.jpg)") on a bill asking for Pakistan to be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism.

Here's the entirety of the exemption according to FOIA statutes.

Inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency

The reality of the situation is that nearly every agency has deployed the exemption to redact information at one point or another. Almost prophetically, the b(5) exemption claims the withheld information can only be released to "agencies in litigation" with the withholding party. And there are certainly plenty of "agencies" engaged in litigation (https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140429/11334527064/governments-antipathy-towards-transparency-has-made-foia-lawsuits-default-process.shtml) with these government entities, albeit mainly in the form of FOIA lawsuits.

Two senators are hoping to fix this and, at the same time, force the government to start following up on its promised FOIA reform (http://freebeacon.com/issues/senate-judiciary-committee-introduces-foia-reform-bill/).

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Leahy and Cornyn, the ranking Judiciary Republican, introduced the FOIA Improvement Act of 2014, which would strengthen Obama administration transparency mandates and reform one of the most abused FOIA exemptions.

President Barack Obama and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder directed federal agencies in 2009 to update their FOIA guidelines and operate with a presumption of openness. However, many agencies ignored the directive.

The bill would codify the administration's reform directives and force responsive agencies to limit use of the b(5) exemption to only information that would cause "foreseeable harm" if disclosed. Granted, that still leaves government agencies with plenty of room to maneuver, but it should trim down the number of b(5) redactions applied to documents like a Presidential Policy Directive ordering the State Department to be more transparent.

On the indisputable plus side, documents over 25 years old are no longer subject to this exemption, meaning long-withheld documents like the previously mentioned Bay of Pigs recounting will no longer be withheld for bogus "deliberative" reasons.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140624/12165327672/senators-pushing-legislation-aimed-reducing-abuse-most-used-foia-exemption.shtml

My prediction: House Repugs will block this bill if it gets out of the Senate. Boner may not even permit a vote

[boutons_deux]

more secrecy, makes you wanna pull out your wallet send them lots of money:

Red Cross: How We Spent Sandy Money Is a "Trade Secret"

Just how badly does the American Red Cross want to keep secret how it raised and spent over $300 million after Hurricane Sandy?

The charity has hired a fancy law firm to fight a public request we filed with New York state, arguing that information about its Sandy activities is a "trade secret."

The Red Cross' "trade secret" argument has persuaded the state to redact some material, though it's not clear yet how much since the documents haven't yet been released.

As we've reported, the Red Cross releases few details (http://www.propublica.org/article/long-after-sandy-red-cross-post-storm-spending-still-a-black-box) about how it spends money after big disasters. That makes it difficult to figure out whether donor dollars are well spent.

The Red Cross did give some information (https://www.propublica.org/article/ny-attorney-general-pressed-red-cross-on-post-sandy-spending-then-retreated) about Sandy spending to New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who had been investigating (http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/1158817-140088-responsive-docs-pgs-21-45#document/p14) the charity. But the Red Cross declined our request to disclose the details.

So we filed a public records request for the information the Red Cross provided to the attorney general's office.

That's where the law firm Gibson Dunn (http://www.gibsondunn.com/default.aspx) comes in.

An attorney (http://www.gibsondunn.com/Lawyers/glevin) from the firm's New York office appealed (http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/1204491-89-5-determination-lt-to-gibson-dunn-requestor) to the attorney general to block disclosure of some of the Sandy information, citing the state Freedom of Information Law's trade secret exemption (http://www.dos.ny.gov/coog/foil2.html).
The documents include "internal and proprietary methodology and procedures for fundraising, confidential information about its internal operations, and confidential financial information," wrote (http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/1204491-89-5-determination-lt-to-gibson-dunn-requestor#document/p2/a164379) Gabrielle Levin of Gibson Dunn in a letter to the attorney general's office.

If those details were disclosed, "the American Red Cross would suffer competitive harm because its competitors would be able to mimic the American Red Cross's business model for an increased competitive advantage," Levin wrote.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/24636-red-cross-how-we-spent-sandy-money-is-a-trade-secret

Red Cross is a "competitive" "business" ?

[Winehole23]

SWAT was created to deal with emergency situations such

as hostage, barricade and active shooter scenarios. Over
time, however, law enforcement agencies have moved away
from this original purpose and are increasingly using these
paramilitary squads to search people’s homes for drugs.
Aggressive enforcement of the War on Drugs has lost
its public mandate, as 67 percent of Americans think
the government should focus more on treatment than
on policing and prosecuting drug users.


4
This waning public support is warranted, as evidence continues to

document how the War on Drugs has destroyed millions
of lives, unfairly impacted communities of color, made
drugs cheaper and more potent, caused countless deaths
of innocent people caught up in drug war-related armed
conflict, and failed to eliminate drug dependence and
addiction. The routine use of heavily armed SWAT teams
to search people’s homes for drugs, therefore, means that
law enforcement agencies across the country are using this
hyper-aggressive form of domestic policing to fight a war
that has waning public support and has harmed, much
more than helped, communitieshttps://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/jus14-warcomeshome-report-web-rel1.pdf

[boutons_deux]

https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/jus14-warcomeshome-report-web-rel1.pdf

can we imagine state or fed legislatures EVER passing legislation to restrict SWAT team attacks? Police pretty much get away with murder, 1 month paid vacation, then back at murderous work.

[Winehole23]

Providing police with military gear does not reduce crime or protect officers: Studies


"The collective assessment of the two studies is that ... the distribution (of military equipment) to local law enforcement doesn’t seem to affect one way or the other. It doesn’t reduce crime, it doesn’t lead to an increase in crime. It doesn’t seem to reduce officer injuries. It doesn’t seem to increase them either," Clark said.https://abcnews.go.com/US/providing-police-military-gear-reduce-crime-protect-officers/story?id=74518923

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-00995-5.epdf

[RandomGuy]

https://abcnews.go.com/US/providing-police-military-gear-reduce-crime-protect-officers/story?id=74518923

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-00995-5.epdf

so it is a boondoggle. A total waste of money.

[boutons_deux]

https://abcnews.go.com/US/providing-police-military-gear-reduce-crime-protect-officers/story?id=74518923

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-00995-5.epdf

Slick Willy was a fantastic ally of conservatives, signing off of several of their strategic priorities


How the Clintons Militarized the Police and Expanded Military Industrial Complex

"The NDAA of 1996, under the Clinton administration, section 1033 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1033_program) altered section 1208,

broadening the scope of available equipment and

made final disposition of equipment a national defense secret."

Grenade launchers and vehicles such as aircraft, watercraft and armored vehicles have also been obtained.”

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/2/24/1490433/-How-the-Clintons-Militarized-the-Police-and-Expanded-Military-Industrial-Complex