Reply With Quote
Well, it happened. No big deal.
Jack , 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.
"No big deal."
you're a hard ass Real Man when (your beloved Big Govt) traumatizes to other people.
Son, it's no big deal. This story will disappear under "who gives a ". 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.
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 ' head'.
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!!!
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?
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"?
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 ed in the process.
The 2nd.....Maybe they are doing both. Patrol and and when needed putting the SWAT gear on.
You still a happy dad?!?!
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 re s. 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.
Sociopaths are assholes, but being an asshole doesn't necesarily make you a sociopath.
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.
Heh fair enough. It was a bit unfair, but it was just my knee-jerk reaction.
I would like a link to this thread, please.
Thank you
original postOver 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, 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 ins utionalized police brutality against its citizenry, usually in the name of the drug war.
the beat goes on: http://www.salon.com/2014/06/24/a_sw..._year_old_son/
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 s playing soldier boy and the courts/legislatures won't stop them.
bull TV policing become bull real-life "policing"
A SWAT team blew a hole in my 2-year-old son
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_sw..._year_old_son/
^^^ three posts above yours.
you don't you read anything before posting, do you?
Why start now?
My versions are ALWAYS better
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 cir vent 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 surrep ious 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-libert...ook-navy-seals
Terrifying.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
