Shyfted One posted:It does. I dunno. At least a few thousand. Edit: off of the top of my head I work with 4 openly gay females, 1 gay guy (who is a huge bear) , I've previously worked with 3-4 openly LGBTQ cops before and I've met a few dozen openly LGBTQ cops. Smiling Jack fucked around with this message at 14:26 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 12:20 |
|
|
Smiling Jack posted:Warren v. District of Columbia Holy poo poo how was I unaware of this  Taking it easy from here on out Shyfted One posted:It does. In a department of ~600 I don't know any openly gay males. There are 2 that I can think of off hand that even with families, it wouldn't surprise me if they came out of the closet. I know several lesbians, 5-6, probably a few more I'm not remembering right now. E2: this is really limited to people I've worked with closely enough to really know them well, I'm sure there's more. beanieson fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
Ethan_Alan posted:It's not stupid to think you guys take it personally, nor am I trying to stir poo poo by asking if you do. You were stirring poo poo by twisting what I meant by "rear end in a top hat cop", not because you asked about the PC stuff. So let me clarify that here - there are cops that are literally afraid to get into a fight. I would rather have a grumpy cop that is at times an rear end in a top hat who is willing to help me out in a fight, then the nice polite cop who is afraid to get into a scuffle. But in general, yes, I don't like rear end in a top hat cops and I'd prefer not to work with them and luckily I really don't have that problem at my department, it's not something I've had to deal with in years. quote:And explain why that was a stupid assumption? Everything I deal with occurs on federal land, and I have probable cause to search if you're out there w/out a permit. There's little room for the legal wrangling like you guys need so I can imagine the frustration, but I think my point still stands. You argue you had PC, the judge decided you didn't. It was a stupid assumption because a court deciding there was no PC doesn't actually mean there wasn't PC. You're drawing the wrong conclusions on why cases might get dropped. There are a few ways to explain it, let me summarize: 1) Someone hires a really expensive defense attorney and the charge gets dropped or pled down. I only used DUI cases as an example because traffic cases are ones where money can sometimes literally buy you freedom. Or for a completely different heinous example, the Rodney King officers involved in the beating were acquitted - does that mean there was no PC for their arrest? 2) An officer on the scene has reasonable belief that probable cause exists for a stop or arrest. Later in court, circumstances are revealed that show the probable cause was in fact not there, though the officer had no way of knowing this at the time. The charge is dropped. 3) An officer makes an illegal stop or illegal arrest with no reasonable grounds to do so whatsoever. The case is dropped. The last one almost never happens, though it's the outcome I'm guessing you're thinking of the most. Because of all the legal gymnastics that goes on in court, you can't take it personally and I don't when charges get dropped. That's why we call it the revolving door. The Shep fucked around with this message at 15:25 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
Whip Slagcheek posted:It's actually extremely rare and the one guy I know that did it lost his job and is being investigated by the FBI. Each of our stations have evidence lockers that only the supervisors have access to and there's a camera watching the door of it. The drugs get dumped into a safe through a mailbox-style slot and only the narcotics custodian has access to it, again with a camera. Those cameras feed directly into internal affairs. I actually want to go back to this for different reasons. Do you think your experience is the default, rare, or varies department by department through out the US? I only ask this because from when I was volunteering at my church and helping out that Narcotics Anonymous had one former officer and one current police officer there, and both mentioned getting part of their fix from stealing evidence.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
NutritiousSnack posted:one former officer and one current police officer there, and both mentioned getting part of their fix from stealing evidence. Our evidence room is secured and the only people that have access are the evidence custodian and maybe the chief. The room is also monitored by camera and keycard access. I would say this is pretty common among modern departments. I would guess that officers stealing evidence are stealing it before they log it into evidence, or not logging it in at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
Do they not have random drug testing in other departments? Around here you pop once on a a drug test and you get fired.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 15:36
|
|
|
Smiling Jack posted:Do they not have random drug testing in other departments? One lost his job over it, so I guess so. Cmdr. Shepard posted:Our evidence room is secured and the only people that have access are the evidence custodian and maybe the chief. The room is also monitored by camera and keycard access. I would say this is pretty common among modern departments. Yeah that actually makes some sense I was just wondering if my city was really that inept for a second or if I misunderstood what I heard. NutritiousSnack fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
Do all cops carry mace?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 15:41
|
|
Yeah, there's always a few every year which is truly  . The hair based drug test goes back a looooong time, you're going to get caught eventually.5-6 a year out of a workforce of 35000 isn't bad I guess but drat, you dumb.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
Smiling Jack posted:Yeah, there's always a few every year which is truly I'm by no means was implying it was common or anything, once again I was just ran into a relatively high concentration of these people because of the nature of how I waste my some of my Saturday afternoons. Drug war poo poo has been mentioned a lot on here, but I'm curious how civil asset forfeiture actually worked for your departments. I know out in the boonies in border states it makes up a huge chunk of the police budget, but for the average department big or small how does it affect you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:02
|
|
|
Evidence room here can be accessed by like four or five evidence technicians and maybe their sworn commander. It's also very secure with cameras and rfids etc. Everything is logged and tracked and specific evidence is secured differently depending upon it's type. If you check something out for court or other reasons and don't return it they'll know about it and start sending notices. My guess is, as has been said, if an officer is taking evidence it may be prior to it's logging and processing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Do all cops carry mace? For the most part they do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
Is it some sort of custom for cops to buy vets coffee? Because I've had like 3 or 4 pay for mine, every time they point to my VA card and tell the clerk its on them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
I think we can all agree the best time to steal evidence is before you even log it in.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
deratomicdog posted:For the most part they do. Why don't they mace dogs instead of murdering them?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Why don't they mace dogs instead of murdering them? pepper spray lingers in the air and all the other officers on scene end up getting sprayed too, so it's not a good option.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Why don't they mace dogs instead of murdering them? I've never seen oc spray work on a dog. On the other hand I have seen a taser work. Some dogs have to be shot though. On a call where a dog was legitimately in the process of killing it's owner it took three shots to the head before it stopped attacking.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
Shyfted One posted:It does. My department has more lesbian officers than I could count, I personally know 7 gay officers off the top of my head, and we have a couple of trans officers as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
Untagged posted:I've never seen oc spray work on a dog. On the other hand I have seen a taser work. Some dogs have to be shot though. On a call where a dog was legitimately in the process of killing it's owner it took three shots to the head before it stopped attacking. What? I live in an area with lots of pig hunting dogs and we have to spray a few making entry to yards and the such. I've never seen spray not work. Sometimes you don't even have to hit them, just mist the area in front of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
CO2 fire extinguishers work very well.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
Tentacle Party posted:What? I live in an area with lots of pig hunting dogs and we have to spray a few making entry to yards and the such. I've never seen spray not work. Sometimes you don't even have to hit them, just mist the area in front of them. I've never witnessed it work myself. Have seen videos and heard stories, but never haave seen oc control an actively aggressive or attacking dog personally throughout the years. Only been present for one dog shooting though and I can tell you without hesitation spray would not have stopped it, and waiting to find out would probably have been negligent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
What's the deal with the patrol car computers. Can you browse the internet and look up Barack Obamas criminal record at the same time?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
Neo Duckberg posted:What's the deal with the patrol car computers. Can you browse the internet and look up Barack Obamas criminal record at the same time? Depends on the agency. Mine is completely unrestricted except for installing programs. So I can run netflix, hulu, etc with no issues.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
Whip Slagcheek posted:Depends on the agency. Mine is completely unrestricted except for installing programs. So I can run netflix, hulu, etc with no issues. What's the database that lets you look poo poo up though?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
criminal histories are about as protected as hipaa is for medical records. You will get caught looking at unauthorized criminal histories and you will get in trouble.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
Neo Duckberg posted:What's the database that lets you look poo poo up though? A lot of agencies develop their own terminals for accessing criminal records, but NCIC is the national database and then each state typically has their own for in-state stuff. DC is WALES, Virginia is VCIN, and Maryland is MILES. That stuff is all tracked by the server so you can't just randomly start running names for your own personal use.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
Why do cops yell "STOP RESISTING!!!" as they beat obviously injured people/ unconscious bodies? Is it for the witnesses or do they genuinely believe it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:28
|
|
|
We do it for the cameras.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
Why do mailmen never need guns to deal with dogs? Why is it only cops?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
mailmen can refuse to go somewhere on the basis of danger. http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/lo...678b7aff4b.html plus you know the old saying about how when you have a hammer every problem looks like a nail?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Why do mailmen never need guns to deal with dogs? Why is it only cops? This was actually why I brought up the mace, because I've heard that every mailman has at least one story about having to mace a dog. Is there some difference in the formula? Like you need specifically dog mace to incapacitate a dog?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
Pretty sure it's the exact same stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
Whip Slagcheek posted:Pretty sure it's the exact same stuff. Ok so why do cops murder dogs all the time if pepper spray works? Also please seriously answer the question above about the whole "stop resisting" thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
because grabbing your gun is your first instinct when a dog is biting you. As to the other question, feel free to rephase it if you want a serious answer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Pepper spray won't always work, hell it doesn't always work on people, I'm just indicating that it's likely the same formula.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
Branis posted:because grabbing your gun is your first instinct when a dog is biting you. This may be the explanation for the incidents when a police officer is actually bitten, but what about the many cases in which no one is bitten and no one, other than the police officer post-incident, claims the dog is aggressive? http://motorcitymuckraker.com/2012/10/17/witnesses-detroit-police-fatally-shoot-three-harmless-dogs-during-pot-bust/ quote:Police burst into James Woods’ house looking for marijuana. He heard a shotgun blast, and Tank (pictured above) “lay dead in a puddle of blood.”Then they saw the other dogs. They raised their weapons. Woods screamed, “Please! They won’t hurt you.” “Witnesses told a consistent story: Police chased the dogs, Hump and Janey, around the house, shooting Woods’ longtime companions as they fled.” Janey (not pictured) dragged a trail of blood around the house until she finally collapsed. Police had shot her as she ran away. http://www.wfaa.com/news/texas-news/212185641.html quote:The warrant was for a man named Bradly Neal Simpson, who is wanted for an expired vehicle registration. The address on the warrant is in Cedar Park, not Liberty Hill where the Simmons have lived for nine years. However, Leander Police say their database shows Simpson’s last known address as the same one where the Simmons live...After entering the Simmons’ gate and knocking on their front door, the Leander police officer began walking around to the back of the house. According to the officer, two German Shepherds starting running toward him, so he fired three shots and one of them struck Vinny in the back of the neck. The Simmons say not only was it a close call for their dog, Vinny, but it was also a close call for their 6-year old terminally ill grandchild playing just around the corner. http://www.khou.com/news/investigative/Are-local-police-shooting-dogs-first-asking-questions-later-207423191.html quote:Soon two officers showed up, and walked up to the couple’s open front door. The Jones say Boss was inside the living room. Wes recalled being in the kitchen, ten to fifteen feet from the dog. Suddenly, he heard knocking, followed by something he’ll never forget. “Right after the knock, I mean two, three seconds,” said Wes. “I hear a shot and then more shots.”] Wes said he didn’t hear any barking or any growling as Boss went toward the door after officers knocked. In a departmental report on the shooting, the HPD officers said, “A large boxer dog charged out the front door.” But the Jones point to pictures they say prove Boss was four feet inside their front door when he was first shot. The couple said their injured dog then ran outside, away from officers, toward his “safe place” where he kept his toys. But the Jones said the bullets kept coming. http://www.wmctv.com/story/19796835/mpd-officer-shoots-loose-dog quote:According to the Memphis Police Department, an officer was flagged down on Spottswood Ave. regarding a loose dog trying to attack a child. "I didn't see anyone flag him down. They must have done it a street over or whatever, but I know my dog hadn't been outside a good three minutes," said owner Michelle Hunter. Investigators said the dog lunged at the child and the officer fired a shot striking the dog. And it's not just Barent that's asking this question. A US justice department study claims "shooting a dog should always be the option of last resort. The safety of fellow officers and bystanders is put at risk in such situations, and when a law enforcement officer shoots a dog that does not constitute a serious threat, community trust is eroded and the department is opened to potential lawsuits and other legal action."
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:54
|
|
|
Branis posted:because grabbing your gun is your first instinct when a dog is biting you. Why is "If it moves, shoot it" the first instinct? And why don't mailmen have a habit of instinctively killing dogs?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
Branis posted:because grabbing your gun is your first instinct when a dog is biting you. As to the other question, feel free to rephase it if you want a serious answer. I don't really know how else to phrase it. Why do so many cops keep being aggressive/brutal and keep saying "stop resisting" even when the perp is clearly not resisting?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
Unfortunately I'm not a mind reader, so I can't tell you why some cops might use excessive force. Anger? Tunnel vision?  Training tells you to use the minimum force necessary to exact an arrest. Beyond that, welp.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 12:20 |
|
|
Resisting arrest can be classified as multiple things and can vary by state or locality. Although it generally includes something the suspect is doing to prevent an arrest and it's associated arrest instructions or actions conveyed by an officer making the arrest. So simply refusing to comply with instructions to place ones hands behind their back when physically able to or physically fighting or fleeing from the police may potentially be met with reasonable force to gain compliance and custody. The clear verbal commands to the suspect to "stop resisting" allow a reasonable person to know they are under arrest and any actions against such arrest or failure to comply with lawful orders during arrest may/or do constitute a resisting of an arrest. That said I don't think I've ever heard the youtube style "STOP RESISTING!x1000" you referenced used on any suspect that was not actively attempting to prevent custody by force. Generally here it's "Stop resisting" followed with or proceeded by the act which is resisting like "place your hands behind your back" or "stop pulling away", etc. It's also a clear verbal command that during a trial many judges will look at and take in to account in the totality of the circumstances as a deciding factor whether it was clear to the suspect they were under arrest and they had been warned their current actions was preventing lawful arrest. Hence, resisting arrest. e. maybe I tried too hard, so this also. Whip Slagcheek posted:Unfortunately I'm not a mind reader, so I can't tell you why some cops might use excessive force. Anger? Tunnel vision?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 06:17
|
|