The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

SWATs Gone Wild: Police State Lite Edition

24

Posts

  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    That baby was a total dick.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    Have we talked about that poor baby with a hole in his chest thanks to a swat team flashbang yet? Because I want to see heads roll on that one. Not that that has any chance of actually happening, because I'm sure that baby was a threat...

    Or the mother with her newborn, or the grandfather, or the vet who was awoken to the sound of persons breaking into his home and therefore grabbed his weapon like American culture told him to do, etc.

    The important thing in those cases - and one that the ACLU really emphasized in that report - is it's not like those instances involved a few sadistic cops looking to kill toddlers or grandparents (I'd say it's pretty clear that the officers involved honestly thought that they'd be Rambo'ing into hardened, armed gangsters): it's just the ultimate end result of toxic police culture, lack of discipline (and moreover, a lack of interest in what proper military discipline looks like) & use of high risk weapons / tools without the extensive training needed to employ them either safely or effectively.

    Heads ought to roll for the officers who acted so recklessly, and then the policing programs that enabled the incident need to be excised from the department.

    With Love and Courage
  • AstaerethAstaereth In the belly of the beastRegistered User regular
    Is it just the case that SWAT teams require enough training that they have to primarily or solely act as SWAT officers, rather than being regular cops who train once a month and are on call in the event that they're needed? If not, then it seems like the problem is having a permanent team sitting around waiting for something to do (so the system finds them something to do, even if it's things they shouldn't be doing).

    On the other side of this argument, too, SWAT isn't just about "buying toys"; I'm sure there's an element of regular cops not wanting to get shot serving a drugs warrant.

    ACsTqqK.jpg
  • KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
    To be fair to the swat team they didn't aim the flash grenade to hit the baby on purpose.

    To also be fair the fact that the person they were looking for was never seen there and the low value of the fucking crime tells me everything else is fully their fault.

    My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
  • Rhan9Rhan9 Registered User regular
    Seems to me that these types of police officers have just enough training to be dangerous, not enough to be competent.

  • rockrngerrockrnger Registered User regular
    As scary and unnecessary as no knock raids and the militarization of police is I don't know if it has a huge effect on the total deaths of officers or civilians.

    Most likely if you are going get killed by a cop its going to be a normal one with a hand gun and if a cop is killed its probably going to be just doing normal stuff. Although both are really unlikely anyway.


    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/2012/tables/table_27_leos_fk_type_of_weapon_2003-2012.xls

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-14

  • Edith UpwardsEdith Upwards Registered User regular
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    Basically, Theres no real way of fixing the police (or by extension, swat) in this country without violence, and I say that because police in America have shown in the past that they are willing to use violence to prevent oversight and restriction on their nearly infinite immunity to their own horrible actions. I'm not advocating violence on the cops, I'm simply saying they've reacted violently in the past to attempts at oversight.

    If you're going to replace the cops you need a second set of cops in place to replace them.

    kgfkzyxom20a.jpg

    THIS IS REALLY FUCKING HARD.

  • Nova_CNova_C I have the need The need for speedRegistered User regular
    That would be the military. If the police start an armed 'riot' because they don't want to be subject to the law, then they are, for all intents and purposes, a rebellion. That's usually when militaries start getting involved.

  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    26988_a.png

    Maybe you can trick them.

  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    I don't really think armed rebellion against the police is the answer. Seems like that would only support the notion that the increased militarization is warranted.

  • Rhan9Rhan9 Registered User regular
    I don't really think armed rebellion against the police is the answer. Seems like that would only support the notion that the increased militarization is warranted.

    This is one of those bullshit issues like a pre-emptive strike (also known as an attack) is sold as a defensive action. An armed rebellion as a response to increased militarization does not justify said militarization, when that very issue is what caused the hypothetical rebellion in the first place.

  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    Rhan9 wrote: »
    I don't really think armed rebellion against the police is the answer. Seems like that would only support the notion that the increased militarization is warranted.

    This is one of those bullshit issues like a pre-emptive strike (also known as an attack) is sold as a defensive action. An armed rebellion as a response to increased militarization does not justify said militarization, when that very issue is what caused the hypothetical rebellion in the first place.

    The actual truth of the matter will be irrelevant to their increased funding and scope.

  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    Historically, an armed rebellion (in the U.S., this usually translates as a massive urban riot) has served to get the politicians to curb police authority. We've gone a couple decades without a big one, but the general reaction from the public and elected officials to dumbshit cops pissing off a community so much that it ends up costing billions in property damage and dozens of deaths is actually not to give the cops more authority.

    No American mayor wants to run a police state. All those armed convoys, aggressive cops and traffic barricades don't mesh well with prosperous mini-malls and thriving tourist traps. It's one of the actual benefits of being a capitalist paradise - permanent lockdown puts a huge crimp on the business community.

  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    The last major Urban Riot was the LA riot in the wake of Rodney King, but I can't for the life of me figure out how the LAPD got curbed.

    Sure it got curbed after Rampart, but that was due to outside agitation and internal investigation.

    The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    The last major Urban Riot was the LA riot in the wake of Rodney King, but I can't for the life of me figure out how the LAPD got curbed.

    Sure it got curbed after Rampart, but that was due to outside agitation and internal investigation.

    LAPD "Tough on Crime, Big on Choking" Chief Daryl Gates got ousted, and the department was subjected to serious internal reforms. None of them made the department a beacon of justice - although LAPD is supposedly somewhat better these days - but there were consequences.

  • Mr RayMr Ray Sarcasm sphereRegistered User regular
    edited June 2014
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    The last major Urban Riot was the LA riot in the wake of Rodney King, but I can't for the life of me figure out how the LAPD got curbed.

    Sure it got curbed after Rampart, but that was due to outside agitation and internal investigation.

    LAPD "Tough on Crime, Big on Choking" Chief Daryl Gates got ousted, and the department was subjected to serious internal reforms. None of them made the department a beacon of justice - although LAPD is supposedly somewhat better these days - but there were consequences.

    Tell that to Christopher Dorner, he seemed to have some pretty serious issues with the way they're doing things. And then they shot at two women, gave one man a neck injury and burned down a cabin to get at him. That's some Chief Wiggum level police work right there.

    Mr Ray on
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    Dorner's testimony should be taken with an enormous grain of salt, but yeah. :|


    With Love and Courage
  • GrombarGrombar Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    Dorner's testimony should be taken with an enormous grain of salt


    To say the least. The main reason he was mad at the LAPD in the first place is because his superior wrote him up for poor impulse control and lack of judgment. And his response to that was to go around killing people in order to "clear his name."

  • DiannaoChongDiannaoChong Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    Dorner's testimony should be taken with an enormous grain of salt, but yeah. :|


    I don't think he had to testify to show their incompetence that he stated was happening. They blindly shot at civilians who were in a vehicle that vaguely resembled his in the least ways. like 'it's a truck, better open fire'. and hurting lots of people in the man hunt.

    steam_sig.png
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue The studying beaver That beaver sure loves studying!Registered User regular
    Mr Ray wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    The last major Urban Riot was the LA riot in the wake of Rodney King, but I can't for the life of me figure out how the LAPD got curbed.

    Sure it got curbed after Rampart, but that was due to outside agitation and internal investigation.

    LAPD "Tough on Crime, Big on Choking" Chief Daryl Gates got ousted, and the department was subjected to serious internal reforms. None of them made the department a beacon of justice - although LAPD is supposedly somewhat better these days - but there were consequences.

    Tell that to Christopher Dorner, he seemed to have some pretty serious issues with the way they're doing things. And then they shot at two women, gave one man a neck injury and burned down a cabin to get at him. That's some Chief Wiggum level police work right there.

    Just for driving a blue truck

    Different model

    Different make

    Different year

    Different license plate

    Same color though SO START SHOOTING

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • Nova_CNova_C I have the need The need for speedRegistered User regular
    It was a different colour, too.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Nova_C wrote: »
    It was a different colour, too.

    Look, it was a motor vehicle and it was vaguely bluish. That's enough.

    It's the same strict criteria they use when evaluating suspects. It's a man and blackish, so it's the guy we are looking for.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote: »
    As scary and unnecessary as no knock raids and the militarization of police is I don't know if it has a huge effect on the total deaths of officers or civilians.

    The number of people who have jumped out of bed and started shouting or acting belligerent or going for their own weapons because, hey, there's people bursting into your home in the middle of the night and then got shot and killed by the police is not zero. The number of times this has happened when they did this SWAT-style no-knock warrant service to the wrong place is not zero. I don't think it's a "huge" effect on total number of civilian deaths, but it would be callous to just say that those deaths are too few to care about.

  • rockrngerrockrnger Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    rockrnger wrote: »
    As scary and unnecessary as no knock raids and the militarization of police is I don't know if it has a huge effect on the total deaths of officers or civilians.

    The number of people who have jumped out of bed and started shouting or acting belligerent or going for their own weapons because, hey, there's people bursting into your home in the middle of the night and then got shot and killed by the police is not zero. The number of times this has happened when they did this SWAT-style no-knock warrant service to the wrong place is not zero. I don't think it's a "huge" effect on total number of civilian deaths, but it would be callous to just say that those deaths are too few to care about.
    Oh sure, the number we are shooting for (no pun intended) is zero but normal police shoot the wrong people when serving normal warrants too.

    The question is is one safer than the other. I don't know if there is evidence to support either one.

  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue The studying beaver That beaver sure loves studying!Registered User regular
    Nova_C wrote: »
    It was a different colour, too.

    Was it? I thought they were both blue.

    Ah well, it was a car! SHOOT!

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    It was a different colour, too.

    Was it? I thought they were both blue.

    Ah well, it was a car! SHOOT!

    And of course no charges or penalties because they were acting reasonably.

  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    It was a different colour, too.

    Was it? I thought they were both blue.

    Ah well, it was a car! SHOOT!

    And of course no charges or penalties because they were acting reasonably.

    If we could just make the police accountable to someone, that would probably fix 80% of the problems, easy.

    As is, even when you have them on video beating up an unarmed person for no reason, it's still coin toss whether there'll be any penalties.

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    It was a different colour, too.

    Look, it was a motor vehicle and it was vaguely bluish. That's enough.

    It's the same strict criteria they use when evaluating suspects. It's a man and blackish, so it's the guy we are looking for.

    "Hey, this guy wasn't even black!"

    "Eh. It was dark outside, okay?"
    rockrnger wrote:
    Oh sure, the number we are shooting for (no pun intended) is zero but normal police shoot the wrong people when serving normal warrants too.

    The question is is one safer than the other. I don't know if there is evidence to support either one.

    Even if we assume that no knock raids haven't resulted in more casualties / unwarranted property damage / catastrophic disruption of life than regular warrant serving (I'm skeptical, but whatever) - it's still bullshit. It's unnecessarily risky, violates the rights of the people being attacked, promotes a culture of violence and creates an adversarial relationship between the police and the public. If the police knock on your door and declare that they have a warrant, and you flip out & are killed as a result, that's much different from the police just breaking down the front door, you flipping out & being killed as a result. Sure, you're dead either way, but in the first instance the responsibility is clearly yours (the police did not instigate a violent confrontation). It's a tragedy, but not one baked into the system.

    With Love and Courage
  • rockrngerrockrnger Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    It was a different colour, too.

    Look, it was a motor vehicle and it was vaguely bluish. That's enough.

    It's the same strict criteria they use when evaluating suspects. It's a man and blackish, so it's the guy we are looking for.

    "Hey, this guy wasn't even black!"

    "Eh. It was dark outside, okay?"
    rockrnger wrote:
    Oh sure, the number we are shooting for (no pun intended) is zero but normal police shoot the wrong people when serving normal warrants too.

    The question is is one safer than the other. I don't know if there is evidence to support either one.

    Even if we assume that no knock raids haven't resulted in more casualties / unwarranted property damage / catastrophic disruption of life than regular warrant serving (I'm skeptical, but whatever) - it's still bullshit. It's unnecessarily risky, violates the rights of the people being attacked, promotes a culture of violence and creates an adversarial relationship between the police and the public. If the police knock on your door and declare that they have a warrant, and you flip out & are killed as a result, that's much different from the police just breaking down the front door, you flipping out & being killed as a result. Sure, you're dead either way, but in the first instance the responsibility is clearly yours (the police did not instigate a violent confrontation). It's a tragedy, but not one baked into the system.
    To me, no effect would default to not doing them so mostly agree.


  • Typhoid MannyTyphoid Manny Registered User regular
    Astaereth wrote: »
    On the other side of this argument, too, SWAT isn't just about "buying toys"; I'm sure there's an element of regular cops not wanting to get shot serving a drugs warrant.

    This isn't an excuse, or at least it shouldn't be. Even if being a cop was a particularly dangerous job (which it isn't, delivering pizzas is more dangerous), part of the job is supposed to be accepting the idea that you might have to put yourself in harm's way if it means protecting members of the public. We shouldn't be okay with cops using equipment and tactics that make them safer at the expense of women and babies. It still wouldn't be okay if a cop could be reasonably worried about getting blown away while he tries to serve a warrant for unpaid library fines, but they don't even reach that bar

    from each according to his ability, to each according to his need
    hitting hot metal with hammers
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited July 2014
    my mom's neighbor was arrested for selling marijuana to an undercover police officer a dozen times over the last year

    I know the cop! I've seen him around, talked to him, I didn't know he was an undercover cop he looked like a high school kid

    The police department spent an entire year doing undercover operations to catch a single pot dealer who wasn't selling pot before the undercover cop told him he should start selling pot

    it should also be pointed out that this guy went to jail once for not paying birthing costs because he lost his job, and he lost his car when he went back to jail because they didn't file the proper paperwork when they released him so they arrested him for breaking out of jail (for a month before realizing that no, he didn't break out, they released him)

    then they launched a long term undercover operation on him

    override367 on
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    my mom's neighbor was arrested for selling marijuana to an undercover police officer a dozen times over the last year

    I know the cop! I've seen him around, talked to him, I didn't know he was an undercover cop he looked like a high school kid

    The police department spent an entire year doing undercover operations to catch a single pot dealer who wasn't selling pot before the undercover cop told him he should start selling pot

    it should also be pointed out that this guy went to jail once for not paying birthing costs because he lost his job, and he lost his car when he went back to jail because they didn't file the proper paperwork when they released him so they arrested him for breaking out of jail (for a month before realizing that no, he didn't break out, they released him)

    then they launched a long term undercover operation on him

    And I wonder why recidivism rates in the U.S. are so high?

    :P

    With Love and Courage
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited July 2014
    to clarify, he was arrested once for selling pot, but the undercover cop bought it from him dozens of times

    if he is to be believed the undercover cop even helped him with supply but idk if that's true

    I let the cop play gta 5 on my xbox (or rather I loaned my xbox and gta 5 to my neighbor when I beat it, his family is really poor and has little in the way of entertainment), what a jerk : /

    override367 on
  • Typhoid MannyTyphoid Manny Registered User regular
    it is not at all hard to believe that the undercover cop gave the dude drugs to sell so he could then bust him for selling drugs

    which really, that's the whole problem, right there in a single sentence. this is not a thing that is outside the realm of possibility.

    from each according to his ability, to each according to his need
    hitting hot metal with hammers
  • knitdanknitdan Registered User regular
    Between that sort of thing, and the FBI's habit of using undercover agents to convince people to join "terrorist" plots that are entirely controlled by the agent...

    I'm beginning to think the concept of Entrapment doesn't actually mean anything.

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
  • Typhoid MannyTyphoid Manny Registered User regular
    entrapment is definitely still a thing, it's just way more narrowly defined than it should be

    from each according to his ability, to each according to his need
    hitting hot metal with hammers
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited July 2014
    it is not at all hard to believe that the undercover cop gave the dude drugs to sell so he could then bust him for selling drugs

    which really, that's the whole problem, right there in a single sentence. this is not a thing that is outside the realm of possibility.

    If he's to be believed, he bought the pot from a guy that was an informant, who he was introduced to by the undercover cop

    I don't know if he's telling the truth or trying to make himself sound less guilty but I know for a fact the cops spent a year to get one guy for selling baggies of pot so it wouldn't surprise me

    this is the same state that held someone a year longer than they were supposed to because of a computer error and only offered him $7000 in compensation

    override367 on
  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    Sometimes I think that the american mobsters won long ago and are wearing the police's skins.

  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
    PLA wrote: »
    Sometimes I think that the american mobsters won long ago and are wearing the police's skins.

    Shit at least the mob was truthful about being corrupt assholes.

  • ButtcleftButtcleft Registered User regular
    edited July 2014
    it is not at all hard to believe that the undercover cop gave the dude drugs to sell so he could then bust him for selling drugs

    which really, that's the whole problem, right there in a single sentence. this is not a thing that is outside the realm of possibility.

    I don't remember the details, but there was a story some time ago about a cop (I don't remember the state, east side of the US I think at least?) who found a guy making small time friendly bets with friends in a bar over sports.

    This officer spent like a year slowly goading the guy into making larger and larger bets with him, because bets over X amount (in the thousands iirc) are an arrestable offense, and when he finally agreed to a bet above the magic number he whipped out his cuffs and arrested the guy.

    Basically, an officer spent a year befriending and goading a man into doing something he'd never normally do so he could arrest him.

    Buttcleft on
Sign In or Register to comment.