|
iyaayas01 posted:The warrant was granted because an officer submitted testimony that the witness said the subject in question was an arms trafficker. The judge granted the warrant on that basis (without any discussion of pictures of guns) I guess a judge could be walking this earth who would sign a warrant that merely read "john doe says suspect is an arms trafficker" without any objective facts but thats very hard to believe. I bet if any of this story is true there is a bunch more to it but who knows. With that said if we assume there is more to this case then the "exaggeration" might not be enough to throw out the warrant. I mean clearly the cops had some suspicion based on some objective fact(s) that there might be contraband or they would never have gone through the trouble of doing anything about this. Its not like the nation's police are waiting idle for some random joe to hand them hearsay with no other info and commit a bunch of resources to investigation. The story is basically bullshit until proven otherwise since all we got is the appeal to this blogger dude's authority.
|
| # ? May 28, 2012 07:58 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2013 18:07 |
|
|
Was the subject a felon, on probation, or anything of that type? I've seen warrants issued for arrest (and related search) because of pictures posted of subjects who fit those categories holding weapons or with weapons ending up on the internet and in the hands of police or probation officers. That could make quite a bit of difference as the wording of the offenses listed associated in the warrant applications would make less of an impact because all that really would have had to have been accomplished was showing a violation of those pre-trial/post-trial/release whatever mandates.
|
| # ? May 28, 2012 11:29 |
|
|
Never Scroll posted:I guess a judge could be walking this earth who would sign a warrant that merely read "john doe says suspect is an arms trafficker" without any objective facts but thats very hard to believe. I bet if any of this story is true there is a bunch more to it but who knows. I like how you decry an appeal to the blogger's authority in the same post you make an appeal to the cop's authority.
|
| # ? May 28, 2012 13:44 |
|
|
I was pretty board with this thread, but I decided to stick with it. See? Board and Stick are different!
|
| # ? May 28, 2012 13:54 |
|
|
captainblastum posted:I like how you decry an appeal to the blogger's authority in the same post you make an appeal to the cop's authority. If you enjoyed that lets examine the role of the DA here: Supposedly this is happening in LA, a major city strapped for resources in the DA's office. We gotta assume someone there took a look at this case and the "exaggerated" warrant application and decided to commit precious resources to seeing a 'weak' case go past plea bargaining (!) and actually make it to a trial. Of course there's a chance that all these people hosed up and some poor guy is getting screwed. That's not enough though because the blog post is reaching further to a place where glaring violations to civil rights see the light of day in court and go unchallenged on a regular basis. That blog post is 100% unsubstantiated sensationalist tripe probably seeking page views. I think I understand the intelligent people who add accounts like this to their chest of 'evidence' against the status quo. If I believed things were this bad I'd probably use whatever little thing might advance my cause whether true or not. Of course I wouldn't waste my campaign on SA though...
|
| # ? May 28, 2012 16:40 |
|
|
2 years ago today a man called Derrick Bird took a shotgun and .22 rifle then proceeded to shoot and kill 12 people in Cumbria. They say that time heals all wounds but some wounds simply cannot be healed. David Bird Kevin Commons Darren Rewcastle Susan Hughes Kenneth Fishburn Jennifer Jackson James Jackson Isaac Dixon Garry Purdham Jamie Clark Michael Pike Jane Robinson RIP The saddest fact is that the majority of those people would still be alive today if the police were properly equipped to deal with the shooting. I am a strong supporter of the routine arming of all British police. In my opinion, being one of the only unarmed police forces in the world is a novelty and the pursuit of this novelty has cost lives. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_shootings
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2012 10:13 |
|
|
 I've always wanted to ask how you felt about that Hezzy. I know that atleast a portion of you guys have access to a firearm, but dont regularly carry the weapon? Would you mind explaining how the system works? Is it secured at HQ or in a vehicle? What do you have to go through to become one of the guys qualified to carry a firearm?
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2012 12:09 |
|
|
How did they disarm your police force in the beginning? You guys have a union right? Did the union fight it? Did anyone see how dangerous of an idea that was to implement, or were people indifferent about it? Were there incidents of officers improperly utilizing weapons that prompted this, or just feel-good legislation from the politicians? Who started the ball rolling? I just have so many questions... I know cops in America are pretty much attached to their weapon and I can't imagine what would happen if they tried to disarm a beat cop. There would probably be strikes. There are some examples of unarmed police officers in America, but the only ones I can think of off the top of my head are certain private college/university police forces (looking at you, Loyola University PD). Cmdr. Shepard fucked around with this message at Jun 2, 2012 around 13:30 |
| # ? Jun 2, 2012 13:25 |
|
|
beanieson posted:
It's worth noting that the firearms that Bird used were legally obtained. I feel very strongly about the routine arming of officers and nobody so far has produced any argument strong enough to change my opinion. Officers came across Bird during his massacre but were unable to engage him because all they had was a metal stick and a glorified water pistol with chillis in it. If they had firearms then at least 7 lives would have been saved. More than half of the total people killed. The firearms system varies across the country. For example in Cumbria, there were no dedicated firearms teams, just specialist officers on call who would come into the station and arm themselves when needed. Now their road traffic units are armed. I've read on public forums / web chats with the force that they just have pistols in a safe in their vehicles. In big cities you usually have one or two dedicated firearms units on 24/7. These guys will carry pistols with them all the time and have carbines in a safe in their vehicle. To be a firearms officer you have to do your probation (2 years on response) and then apply. You've got to pass fitness and medical tests similar to the armed forces, then you do months of intensive training. They are incredibly well trained. Most firearms officers go their entire career without opening firing on anyone. Cmdr. Shepard posted:How did they disarm your police force in the beginning? You guys have a union right? Did the union fight it? Did anyone see how dangerous of an idea that was to implement, or were people indifferent about it? Were there incidents of officers improperly utilizing weapons that prompted this, or just feel-good legislation from the politicians? Who started the ball rolling? I just have so many questions... I'm not sure how it happened. The last I remember was officers being armed rag tag with their personal handguns in the 1970s and that was before PACE, one of the most important pieces of legislation ever created. I will look into it and get back to you guys. We don't have a union, that is illegal. We have a federation which is not very effective. I certainly wouldn't want to be a cop in America without a gun. I can see it being absolutely vital there in day to day policing with the threat that everyone could be carrying a firearm. Here it is more out security against worst case scenarios. I'm convinced that somebody with a few shotguns or a handgun could cause an unprecedented amount of death and carnage if they planned it properly. We're so vulnerable it is ridiculous. For example it took a good 20 minutes or so after the first firearms incident for any kind of relevant officers to be mobilised. Any kind of Mumbai style attack would be disastrous. If one man can go on an unplanned rampage in a rural area with a shotgun and rifle and kill a dozen people, imagine what equipped terrorists with automatic weapons and military training can do in a shopping centre or enclosed space. Hezzy fucked around with this message at Jun 2, 2012 around 13:42 |
| # ? Jun 2, 2012 13:32 |
|
|
Hezzy posted:For example it took a good 20 minutes or so after the first firearms incident for any kind of relevant officers to be mobilised. Any kind of Mumbai style attack would be disastrous. If one man can go on an unplanned rampage in a rural area with a shotgun and rifle and kill a dozen people, imagine what equipped terrorists with automatic weapons and military training can do in a shopping centre or enclosed space. It's tough, because the likelihood of a Mumbai style terrorist attack is vanishingly small. Even with examples like the Cumbria shooting gun deaths in the UK are tiny. What does increase if you arm police are chances of accidental shootings (Charles de Mendez), theft/loss of guns from officers and lack of trust between the police and public. That last one is a biggy, guns scare most people in the UK. Really talk to anybody whose been on holiday in Spain or France, tourists always go OMG they carry such massive guns. I don't think its fair to take one extreme event and use it to base a massive change in policing, that would be similar to someone looking at Columbine in the USA and saying that all guns should be banned. Its not really proof of anything. I would also note that Police in Norway and Finland are armed yet that hasn't prevented terrorist atrocities (Norway) or multiple school shootings (Finland).
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2012 10:10 |
|
|
Norwegian police are not armed per see, but have easy access to weapons locked inside the cars.
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2012 12:06 |
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:I would also note that Police in Norway and Finland are armed yet that hasn't prevented terrorist atrocities (Norway) or multiple school shootings (Finland). Arming police doesn't prevent anything, but it allows police to respond far faster and with the potential of many more lives saved because they're equipped to deal with the problem. quote:What does increase if you arm police are chances of accidental shootings (Charles de Mendez), theft/loss of guns from officers and lack of trust between the police and public. That last one is a biggy, guns scare most people in the UK. I'm not aware of many accidental shootings - man I think the last one I remember was the video of that DEA guy shooting himself in the foot while giving a presentation to a class. Either way, if you write off the small number of violent incidents, then you can't also claim that another small number of incidents (accidental shootings) is pertinent. Guns scare people in America too, but what is the point of a police force if they're not equipped to deal with threats to life? After Columbine, American police forces adopted the tactic of "rapid response". We're training in rapid response while the UK police are sitting around for 20 minutes while their firearms teams assemble? That puts the UK behind the times to say the least, and just the idea baffles my mind. Freudian slippers posted:Norwegian police are not armed per see, but have easy access to weapons locked inside the cars. Although I still disagree with the idea of unarmed police, at least having access to weapons in the vehicle sounds more reasonable than having entirely unarmed police. Would this work for the UK? I'm also curious about the "months and months" of training that UK police go through to be certified to carry guns. Our state firearms training class is 40 hours and you're good to go! While I think that's probably too small a number, it is a huge disparity between US and UK armed cops. I never say no to training, but months of training to carry a firearm sounds... excessive? edit: Hezzy, how many UK cops have been stabbed or otherwise injured by a knife? Found this on a basic google search: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15803860 quote:Four police officers have been stabbed after being called to a disturbance in north-west London. The fact that one guy with a knife is able to disable 4 police officers is just  . I could never do this job unarmed.
Cmdr. Shepard fucked around with this message at Jun 3, 2012 around 16:01 |
| # ? Jun 3, 2012 15:29 |
|
|
Cmdr. Shepard posted:I'm also curious about the "months and months" of training that UK police go through to be certified to carry guns. Our state firearms training class is 40 hours and you're good to go! While I think that's probably too small a number, it is a huge disparity between US and UK armed cops. I never say no to training, but months of training to carry a firearm sounds... excessive? My understanding of the armed police in the UK is they're not so much cops with guns as much as they're basically UK's version of SWAT, hence the large amount of training.
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2012 21:55 |
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:It's tough, because the likelihood of a Mumbai style terrorist attack is vanishingly small. Even with examples like the Cumbria shooting gun deaths in the UK are tiny. There's a recent worrying trend of incidents that leave officers completely disabled and unable to do anything. For example, 30 cops vs 1 man with a machete. There has been a steep rise in firearms related incidents, due to the nature of such incidents no amount of intelligence could prepare the police for them. Derrick Bird and Raul Moat spring to mind, all random shootings in the last couple of years. Menezes wasn't an accidental shooting - it was a number of officers pursuing a terror suspect in tense days after the London bombings. They chased Menezes thinking he was going to detonate himself on the tube. They took necessary measures to prevent this from happening and it is unfortunate it was a false alarm. They were justified in their use of force due to the threat posed by Menezes as perceived by the officers on scene. A thorough investigation was carried out by both the Metropolitan Police and the IPCC and they both found the officer's actions to be sound. I agree with you on the loss / theft of the weapons, however the rate of loss and theft of current firearms and other equipment is very low. There are armed officers on near every street corner in London. They're all over airports as well. I don't think people are intimidated by them as certain people would like you to think. Yes, Spanish and French cops are armed but you don't hear stories of British tourists cancelling subsequent holidays or staying in their hotel room for the duration because they're scared. It's such a non-issue - I'm sure after a few months of arming happening nobody would bat an eyelid. In fact, I've personally attended a few mundane, ordinary jobs where I have taken over from firearms officers who have their handguns prominently displayed in a thigh holster and nobody commented on it at all. It's not just one extreme event. Violence is escalating and something needs to be done to ensure the public's safety. At the very least, tasers should be standard issue or readily accessible when required. It will stop officers being injured left right and centre. In fact in just the past two nights, 90% of my local town's shift have been injured during domestic violence incidents over the weekend. Nothing serious gladly, just bruises and black eyes. This wouldn't happen if the police were properly equipped. Cryogenic Jesus posted:My understanding of the armed police in the UK is they're not so much cops with guns as much as they're basically UK's version of SWAT, hence the large amount of training. This is pretty much true except they're sent to every single firearms incident. Pointing guns at 13 year olds running around with a plastic toy rifles isn't exactly high speed low drag
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2012 03:55 |
|
|
Hezzy posted:It's not just one extreme event. Violence is escalating and something needs to be done to ensure the public's safety. At the very least, tasers should be standard issue or readily accessible when required. It will stop officers being injured left right and centre. In fact in just the past two nights, 90% of my local town's shift have been injured during domestic violence incidents over the weekend. Nothing serious gladly, just bruises and black eyes. This wouldn't happen if the police were properly equipped. Is violence escalating? Do you have some evidence that shows a statistically significant increase? And are you suggesting that in the last 2 nights, 90% of your shift should have shot somebody?
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2012 17:11 |
|
|
captainblastum posted:Is violence escalating? Do you have some evidence that shows a statistically significant increase? And are you suggesting that in the last 2 nights, 90% of your shift should have shot somebody? The problem with the British Crime Survery is that the figures they use are not recorded truthfully. For example, in my old police force we were told to record crimes as different things depending on what were problems. If assaults were up in the city centre, we would crime drunken fights as "Drunk and Disorderly" which skew the figures and make it look like there wasn't much of a problem. Another example is criming attempts to break into sheds to steal things (like lawnmowers and tools) as criminal damage instead of attempted thefts. This has been a staple of British Policing ever since Labour took over and there are entire "Crime Reduction Units" within police divisions filled full of shiny arsed staff that serve to massage figures and statistics to show that crime is being reduced when it actually is not as well as sending snotty emails when they think you've crimed something "wrong". They will actually ask you to change your crime to something else and if you don't play ball, they will go over your head and change it themselves complete with making sure an Inspector sends you an angry email about how you're "resistant to change" and all sorts of other buzzword filled nonsense that is flavour of the month. Some more examples can be found in this blog post and the subsequent comments section as well as in this newspaper article. This article by the Telegraph writes about an independent study that found that violent crime increased by 44% between 1998 and 2010, in stark contrast to the British Crime Survey which states that violent crime fell by 41% in the same period. The 85% disparity between the study and the BCS says it all. Not to mention I have actually experienced the escalation of violence in our society. When I was young in service, big fights weren't all that common but prior to me transferring to a quieter force we were attending multiple fights per night. And no, I'm not suggesting that people should have been shot for giving police officers black eyes. That is ridiculously absurd. If you read that quote again, you'll see that I was talking about tasers. There is no possible way those officers would have been injured had they been issued and trained in the use of a taser. Hezzy fucked around with this message at Jun 5, 2012 around 03:32 |
| # ? Jun 5, 2012 03:12 |
|
|
Being armed is a show of force, and I submit that that alone would help in alleviating violence against police officers.
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2012 03:40 |
|
|
Hezzy posted:And no, I'm not suggesting that people should have been shot for giving police officers black eyes. That is ridiculously absurd. If you read that quote again, you'll see that I was talking about tasers. There is no possible way those officers would have been injured had they been issued and trained in the use of a taser. What are the rules/the standard on British cops carrying tasers?
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2012 04:15 |
|
|
Hezzy posted:And no, I'm not suggesting that people should have been shot for giving police officers black eyes. That is ridiculously absurd. If you read that quote again, you'll see that I was talking about tasers. There is no possible way those officers would have been injured had they been issued and trained in the use of a taser. I missed taser in there, that's my bad. I agree with the principals of what you're asking for. It's unreasonable to expect anybody outside of a professional fighter or full-contact athlete (and let's ignore the CTE thing with athletes at the moment) to receive a black eye as part of their job. And I do agree that the police should outgun criminals, though there is a balance that must be struck between everyday occurrences and very rare events when it comes to planning, budgets (both time and money) aren't infinite. But I don't think that pistols and tasers are going to be the panacea that you want them to be. If all of the police in the UK were suddenly armed, I think you'd find that nothing really changed (aside from spending a lot of money on guns).
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2012 14:03 |
|
|
Time for the Jaablaw update with hosed up/interesting poo poo from South Florida! http://jaablog.jaablaw.com/files/34...e_Cause_3rd.pdf Bail Bondsman in a car rigged up to look like an undercover police vehicle, attempts to conduct a traffic stop on a car full of SWAT officers conducting an undercover investigation. He then tries to ask for professional courtesy when they arrest him for impersonating a law enforcement officer. I cannot make this poo poo up. http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/j...ng-2366534.html Judge rules unconstitutional for PBSO deputies to threaten to arrest nurses for obstruction of justice if they refuse to conduct a blood draw on DUI suspects (relevant hospital policy: all blood draws must come from a doctor's order.) http://www.4dca.org/opinions/May%20...08-4624.op..pdf Interesting opinion affirming a juvenile conviction of life without parole for a member of a group of kids who got bored and beat random homeless people to death. The interesting part is end of page 2 through the end of the opinion on page 3, interpreting recent Supreme Court decisions to hold that life without possibility of parole on a juvenile is not categorically unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment. This drama: http://justicebuilding.blogspot.com...oweird-v34.html quote:So lets summarize what has occurred: http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/...11-1865_ROR.pdf ASA Scheinberg recommended for 1 year suspension of license to practice law by Florida Bar Referee for sexting the judge in a death penalty case.
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2012 15:59 |
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:What are the rules/the standard on British cops carrying tasers? They have to undergo a week residential training course. Then they can carry it on their duty belt. Very few officers are trained in taser - all firearms officers are and they're slowly starting to roll it out amongst response officers. Before I transferred to my new force, 2 people per shift (out of 20ish) had tasers. In my current force, my station isn't equipped with taser lockers so none of us can do the training. Nearest taser officer within my force is probably 60+ miles away.
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2012 16:39 |
|
|
Hezzy posted:In my current force, my station isn't equipped with taser lockers so none of us can do the training. Nearest taser officer within my force is probably 60+ miles away. I thought official vocab guidelines stated that calling it "force" was too aggressive.
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2012 17:41 |
|
|
Let's have the LEO vs peace officer debate again!
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2012 18:23 |
|
|
beanieson posted:Let's have the LEO vs peace officer debate again! Someone once posted in response to me that "calling myself an LEO was very telling". 
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2012 18:29 |
|
|
Cmdr. Shepard posted:Someone once posted in response to me that "calling myself an LEO was very telling". Same here  That being said, I usually only use LEO when typing due to the fact we have Police Officers, Sheriff Deputys, Federal Agents, Fire Marshalls, MP's, constables, and State Troopers in my jurisdiction. I also know I'm probably forgetting someone.
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2012 18:32 |
|
|
Hezzy posted:They have to undergo a week residential training course. Then they can carry it on their duty belt. Very few officers are trained in taser - all firearms officers are and they're slowly starting to roll it out amongst response officers. Before I transferred to my new force, 2 people per shift (out of 20ish) had tasers. In my current force, my station isn't equipped with taser lockers so none of us can do the training. Nearest taser officer within my force is probably 60+ miles away. Get yourself down to the MET Hezzy! The joy of double crewed units, 'Trojan' and the 'orange cavalry button' :P.... and all of the politics to go along with it!
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2012 21:41 |
|
|
HORT1 posted:Get yourself down to the MET Hezzy! The joy of double crewed units, 'Trojan' and the 'orange cavalry button' :P.... and all of the politics to go along with it! Unfortunately the Met is probably one of the only forces who aren't rolling tasers out to response units! Plus they're statistically one of the worst police forces in the country... Lancashire FTW 
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2012 21:45 |
|
|
I was just trying to make a Hot Fuzz reference, because BritCop and all.
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2012 21:48 |
|
|
Hezzy posted:Unfortunately the Met is probably one of the only forces who aren't rolling tasers out to response units! I think we're gradually having tasers rolled out to response teams now. As and when it happens, well... Come on, we all know the stats get duked!
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2012 22:37 |
|
|
beanieson posted:Let's have the LEO vs peace officer debate again! I'll make it easy, I don't consider myself a LEO or a Peace Officer, I consider myself a Sworn Problem solver. Seriously that is what a cop does, we solve problems. If someone breaks the law it's a problem, if someone has an issue that they can't figure out, it's a problem. If someone gets into a crash and needs a report for insurance, that's a problem. Policing is problem solving.
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2012 23:20 |
|
|
Thesoldier posted:I'll make it easy, I don't consider myself a LEO or a Peace Officer, I consider myself a Sworn Problem solver. I love this answer
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2012 01:30 |
|
|
Thesoldier posted:I'll make it easy, I don't consider myself a LEO or a Peace Officer, I consider myself a Sworn Problem solver. also problem creating
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2012 02:00 |
|
|
Thesoldier posted:If someone gets into a crash and needs a report for insurance, that's a problem.
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2012 04:08 |
|
|
LongDarkNight posted:I spent most of Monday I absolutely abhor writing anything by hand because my handwriting is atrocious. This is actually pretty close to it;  I got a case file back from the Crown Prosecution Service once because they couldn't read a scan of my Pocket Note Book. Attached was a note that read "You're clearly literate judging by the wonderful writing in the statement, but your handwriting is dreadful. What went wrong?" I sent them a typed translation of my PNB as well as a typed note that simply read "Computers." I pretty much always provide a typed transcript now whenever I have to scan my PNB.
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2012 04:52 |
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2012 05:05 |
|
|
No lie, my handwriting is nearly that bad. If I have to go back to review notes that are more than a week old I have trouble understanding what I've written 
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2012 07:18 |
|
|
It's pretty bad when you have Judges call you out in open court for bad handwritting.
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2012 14:32 |
|
|
I give agagajdjdusjsjshxuxbsbdbpqpq
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2012 23:37 |
|
|
For US goons, what are your professional and/or personal opinions about the Los Angeles Police Department? I was considering applying with them after my current job. Good employer or not?
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2012 02:06 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2013 18:07 |
|
|
I don't think we even have any CA cops that post regularly, but I have a buddy who worked for LA county in the early 2000s that had nothin but bad things to say about LAPD but it was mostly about the brass breathing down the officers necks and dealing with wierd poo poo and homeless people all day.
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2012 03:25 |
|
