# Stuff and Things > Guns and Self Defense >  Police TOO over-militarized?/baby hurt by grenade

## Corruptbuddha

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/3...ing-drug-raid/

19 month old kid in a medically induced coma since cops toss a flash-bang into his crib.

Quick question...why do cops need that much power to take down ONE drug dealer?

The war on drugs claims yet another casualty.

----------

BleedingHeadKen (05-30-2014),DeadEye (05-30-2014),michaelr (05-30-2014)

----------


## St James

where the hell is Don? He'll explain it all away, after all, he's written the handbook on cop behavior justification

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014)

----------


## Invayne

Standard police procedure. Nothing to see here.....

----------

BleedingHeadKen (05-30-2014),Sled Dog (06-01-2014),St James (05-30-2014)

----------


## Invayne

> Police said they seized drugs at the home and returned with a no-knock warrant to arrest a man known to have drugs and weapons.


Well there ya go. It was obviously the baby's fault for hanging with the "wrong" crowd.

----------

BleedingHeadKen (05-30-2014),DeadEye (05-30-2014)

----------


## Roadmaster

Saying they didn't see any baby items, well why don't they just tell the truth and say they didn't look. All they are doing is covering for themselves but it's clear they are not telling the truth and just makes them look not sorry for what happened to the baby.

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014),St James (05-30-2014)

----------


## Toefoot



----------


## michaelr

*When will the police be TOO over-militarized? A bunch of years ago!*

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014)

----------


## Invayne

> Saying they didn't see any baby items, well why don't they just tell the truth and say they didn't look. All they are doing is covering for themselves but it's clear they are not telling the truth and just makes them look not sorry for what happened to the baby.


They're not sorry. They don't care.

----------


## michaelr

Well come on, lets look at this from the copsuckers perspective. The kid was probably going to be a criminal anyway. So, well, the friendly nonviolent mercenaries actually helped, anyway the parents are to blame, they were asleep durring the no knock warrant!

----------


## DonGlock26

> . Friday, May 30, 2014 
> 
> 
> *Toddler critically injured by ‘flash bang’ during police search*
> 
> 
> The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
> 
> *UPDATE:* The mother of a 19-month-old boy critically injured when a police device was tossed into his bed in Habersham County said Friday there is no way officers should not have known there were children in the house.
> ...



I guess the criminal-supporters would have rather had the cops get into a gun battle over the crib. 

Why did the mother have a baby in a drug house? Was meth being cooked there? What responsibility does she have to keep her baby out of drug houses?

It sucks that this happens and I hope the baby makes a full recovery. Kids don't belong in meth labs or drug houses.

----------

Archer (05-30-2014),Matt (05-30-2014),Sheldonna (05-30-2014)

----------


## michaelr

> I guess the criminal-supporters would have rather had the cops get into a gun battle over the crib. 
> 
> Why did the mother have a baby in a drug house? Was meth being cooked there? What responsibility does she have to keep her baby out of drug houses?
> 
> It sucks that this happens and I hope the baby makes a full recovery. Kids don't belong in meth labs or drug houses.


They could knock on the door. The copsucking bootlickers love fucking up babies, it gives meaning to their dull lives!

----------


## Toefoot

> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/3...ing-drug-raid/
> 
> 19 month old kid in a medically induced coma since cops toss a flash-bang into his crib.
> 
> Quick question...why do cops need that much power to take down ONE drug dealer?
> 
> The war on drugs claims yet another casualty.

----------


## Sheldonna

> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/3...ing-drug-raid/
> 
> 19 month old kid in a medically induced coma since cops toss a flash-bang into his crib.
> 
> Quick question...why do cops need that much power to take down ONE drug dealer?
> 
> The war on drugs claims yet another casualty.


Because a lot of times, the drug dealers (also drug users) come out shooting and cops get killed.  But still, they should be using non-injurious types of weapons like tear gas.  And why a "flash bang grenade"?  Whatever happened to knocking down the door and demanding that everyone come out with their hands up....and THEN if the cops get fired on....and only then, use the other weapons.  It does seem like overkill.  I suppose Dev could shed some light on that "why".

----------


## Toefoot

Don, it is the tactics that come into question. The what if's are bullshit. So much for recon. I do not have a hard on for LE but in my opinion you can not apply the same tactics we use in war with the civilian population.....if you do apply such tactics you better have your shit wired correctly and in this case LE was a soup sandwich.

Fact is this tactic in some cases was against ROE.




> I guess the criminal-supporters would have rather had the cops get into a gun battle over the crib. 
> 
> Why did the mother have a baby in a drug house? Was meth being cooked there? What responsibility does she have to keep her baby out of drug houses?
> 
> It sucks that this happens and I hope the baby makes a full recovery. Kids don't belong in meth labs or drug houses.

----------


## Sheldonna

> I guess the criminal-supporters would have rather had the cops get into a gun battle over the crib. 
> 
> Why did the mother have a baby in a drug house? Was meth being cooked there? What responsibility does she have to keep her baby out of drug houses?
> 
> It sucks that this happens and I hope the baby makes a full recovery. Kids don't belong in meth labs or drug houses.


Could these drug aholes be slimey enough to use children as shields, like the radical muslims do?

----------


## michaelr

The thing about these militarized police, they're obviously cowards!

----------


## DeadEye

> I guess the criminal-supporters would have rather had the cops get into a gun battle over the crib. 
> 
> Why did the mother have a baby in a drug house? Was meth being cooked there? What responsibility does she have to keep her baby out of drug houses?
> 
> It sucks that this happens and I hope the baby makes a full recovery. Kids don't belong in meth labs or drug houses.


No, I think the dumb bastards should have waited for him to appear outside the residence, maybe taking a trip to the store or something, and then arrested him. Since he would be in their custody they could have then executed a regular warrant for more evidence instead of having a military style attack on one's residence.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014),michaelr (05-30-2014),Mordent (05-31-2014),St James (05-30-2014)

----------


## michaelr

> No, I think the dumb bastards should have waited for him to appear outside the residence, maybe taking a trip to the store or something, and then arrested him. Since he would be in their custody they could have then executed a regular warrant for more evidence instead of having a military style attack on one's residence.


That takes courage, I think todays cops lack that.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## DeadEye

> That takes courage, I think todays cops lack that.


Who knows but I think military style operations need to be ended and more reasonable means should be employed. Most cops, like soldiers, carry out their orders the way they were trained.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014),michaelr (05-30-2014)

----------


## Sheldonna

> No, I think the dumb bastards should have waited for him to appear outside the residence, maybe taking a trip to the store or something, and then arrested him. Since he would be in their custody they could have then executed a regular warrant for more evidence instead of having a military style attack on one's residence.


Kinda reminiscent of the Branch Davidian massacre.  They could have arrested Koresh away from the house too.  But obviously...they* wanted* to attack the whole compound.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> They could knock on the door. The copsucking bootlickers love fucking up babies, it gives meaning to their dull lives!


Not with that assclown and his AK-47. If the baby was killed in a shootout, you'd be screaming that the cops didn't use a flashbang.  :Lame:

----------


## DonGlock26

> Because a lot of times, the drug dealers (also drug users) come out shooting and cops get killed.  But still, they should be using non-injurious types of weapons like tear gas.  And why a "flash bang grenade"?  Whatever happened to knocking down the door and demanding that everyone come out with their hands up....and THEN if the cops get fired on....and only then, use the other weapons.  It does seem like overkill.  I suppose Dev could shed some light on that "why".


Because drug dealers shoot through doors and AK-47 rounds will go into the neighbor's houses too.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Don, it is the tactics that come into question. The what if's are bullshit. So much for recon. I do not have a hard on for LE but in my opinion you can not apply the same tactics we use in war with the civilian population.....if you do apply such tactics you better have your shit wired correctly and in this case LE was a soup sandwich.
> 
> Fact is this tactic in some cases was against ROE.


The tactics in a war would be to throw in a frag, if you thought a guy with an AK-47 was in the next room. They threw in what amounted to a large firecracker. Sadly, the mother had her baby in a drug house.

----------


## Sheldonna

> Because drug dealers shoot through doors and AK-47 rounds will go into the neighbor's houses too.


Yeah.  That too.  And if  they don't even care about their own kids' safety....they sure as hell wouldn't give a crap if their neighbors got shot in the process of their arrest.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Could these drug aholes be slimey enough to use children as shields, like the radical muslims do?


Of course.

----------


## DonGlock26

> No, I think the dumb bastards should have waited for him to appear outside the residence, maybe taking a trip to the store or something, and then arrested him. Since he would be in their custody they could have then executed a regular warrant for more evidence instead of having a military style attack on one's residence.


And, risk a high speed chase? The warrant was a search warrant-BTW.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Yeah.  That too.  And if  they don't even care about their own kids' safety....they sure as hell wouldn't give a crap if their neighbors got shot in the process of their arrest.


You've got that right.

----------


## Sheldonna

> And, risk a high speed chase?


I guess there is no 100% safe way for them to make an arrest then.  Even if they got the guy right outside the apartment building entrance, they would risk accidentally shooting bystanders.  I guess the way they did it was the safest, but I still don't agree with the grenade part.

----------


## Sheldonna

> Of course.


I remember a movie where this female police officer and her team were trying to make a drug arrest.  This black lady got out of a car with a baby strapped to her.  It went downhill from there.  Can't remember the name of that movie, but I wondered then if that had been based on a real life incident.  Probably was.

----------


## Toefoot

Don, I am guessing your training is limited at best. You deserve what you get.......




> The tactics in a war would be to throw in a frag, if you thought a guy with an AK-47 was in the next room. They threw in what amounted to a large firecracker. Sadly, the mother had her baby in a drug house.

----------


## michaelr

Throwing gernades into homes where children are is called reckless endangerment and is a crime!

----------


## DeadEye

> Kinda reminiscent of the Branch Davidian massacre.  They could have arrested Koresh away from the house too.  But obviously...they* wanted* to attack the whole compound.


Yes, exactly, they want people to fear them and what they can do. in reality most police forces are the vanguard of the collectivist. unwitting participants in the NWO. For now, until the veil is lifted, it's business as usual.

----------


## Katzndogz

The situation is this:

The streets of our cities are war zones no less than Fallujah or Aleppo.  The criminals are getting increasingly powerful and sophisticated weaponry.   The criminal gangs are really an insurgency using the same tactics as the Taliban.  This includes hiding behind families, women and children.   The police are responding to these changes.   Americans haven't yet recognized what these changes mean.

----------


## DeadEye

> Not with that assclown and his AK-47. If the baby was killed in a shootout, you'd be screaming that the cops didn't use a flashbang.


That's nonsense and a false dichotomy. Had they used proper police procedure and apprehended him in the least volatile situation non of this would have accured.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014),michaelr (05-30-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> I guess there is no 100% safe way for them to make an arrest then.  Even if they got the guy right outside the apartment building entrance, they would risk accidentally shooting bystanders.  I guess the way they did it was the safest, but I still don't agree with the grenade part.


It's a distraction device designed to prevent a gun battle. They are used to save hostages too. 

If they had thrown a grenade, the baby wouldn't be in the hospital.

Flashbang:




M-80 firecracker:





Grenade:




*@ 3:05*

----------


## DonGlock26

> That's nonsense and a false dichotomy. Had they used proper police procedure and apprehended him in the least volatile situation non of this would have accured.


They did use proper police procedure. The mother just happened to have a baby in a drug house.

----------


## DeadEye

> And, risk a high speed chase? The warrant was a search warrant-BTW.


More non sense. Who said it had to be a chase involved. Get him when he is not in a vehicle. Watch the residence and him until the time is right. A no knock warrant is unjustified and is but an excuse for the police to be aggressive in their operations.

----------


## DeadEye

> I guess there is no 100% safe way for them to make an arrest then.  Even if they got the guy right outside the apartment building entrance, they would risk accidentally shooting bystanders.  I guess the way they did it was the safest, but I still don't agree with the grenade part.


Not hardly and that is one of the reasons they get away with militarized operations and tactics. People simply don't take the time to reason things out and accept things as proper when they are not. Who knows if he were outside when arrested if he would even be armed or have the need for a fire fight?

----------


## DeadEye

> They did use proper police procedure. The mother just happened to have a baby in a drug house.


The mothers behavior with regards to her children has no bearing on the matter. The behavior of the officers in charge is very much so under question.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## Sheldonna

> Yes, exactly, they want people to fear them and what they can do. in reality most police forces are the vanguard of the collectivist. unwitting participants in the NWO. *For now, until the veil is lifted, it's business as usual*.


Apparently so.  But I can't help but wonder....how long before they go 'too far'?   I suspect there's a lot of people (not just me) out there that have had enough of these kind of stories and see where it's all headed.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Don, I am guessing your training is limited at best. You deserve what you get.......



LOL!!! Yeah, ok......

----------


## DonGlock26

> More non sense. Who said it had to be a chase involved. Get him when he is not in a vehicle. Watch the residence and him until the time is right. A no knock warrant is unjustified and is but an excuse for the police to be aggressive in their operations.


It was a search warrant.

 Ok, you don't like no knock warrants of drug houses. You should join the police reserves and volunteer to take the point.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Not hardly and that is one of the reasons they get away with militarized operations and tactics. People simply don't take the time to reason things out and accept things as proper when they are not. Who knows if he were outside when arrested if he would even be armed or have the need for a fire fight?


And, if they knock on the door and get blasted in the face with an AK-47, are you writing the letter to the widows? Are you accepting responsibility for the gunfight afterwards and all the rounds exchanged?

----------


## DonGlock26

> The mothers behavior with regards to her children has no bearing on the matter. The behavior of the officers in charge is very much so under question.


More nonsense.

Yes, it matters a great deal. Drug houses are inherently dangerous places and she put her baby in harm's way. 

Question away. They were serving a search warrant for a meth dealer believed to be armed with an AK-47. They decided a flashbang distraction device was better than a gunfight in an urban area. If the baby had been hit by a stray police round in a gunfight, you'd be fine with that?

----------


## Invayne

> The thing about these militarized police, they're obviously cowards!


It was a baby, fer gawds sake...they feerd for their life!

----------


## Invayne

> Who knows but I think military style operations need to be ended and more reasonable means should be employed. Most cops, like soldiers, carry out their orders the way they were trained.


Like the mindless robots that they are. That's why the police don't want to hire anyone with intelligence. They might start questioning this shit.

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014)

----------


## michaelr

> It was a baby, fer gawds sake...they feerd for their life!


A baby with an AK-47 even.

----------


## Hansel

> Well come on, lets look at this from the copsuckers perspective. The kid was probably going to be a criminal anyway. So, well, the friendly nonviolent mercenaries actually helped, anyway the parents are to blame, they were asleep durring the no knock warrant!


Call it collateral damage. What does it take to make believers out of drug addicts?  I feel sorry for the baby but that is life with counter culture types.
They were probably so stoned that they didn't even knew what hit them.

----------


## Invayne

> Apparently so.  But I can't help but wonder....how long before they go 'too far'?   I suspect there's a lot of people (not just me) out there that have had enough of these kind of stories and see where it's all headed.


THey've gone "too far" too many times already. Yes, most of us have had enough of these stories and we can certainly see where it's all headed. Unfortunately, there are some fascist copsuckers that are enjoying every minute of it.

----------


## Hansel

> It was a search warrant.
> 
>  Ok, you don't like no knock warrants of drug houses. You should join the police reserves and volunteer to take the point.


Don, talking to users is like talking to  a wall.  One would think they could see the writing on the wall, but maybe they are blinded by a drug induced stupor.

----------

DonGlock26 (05-30-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

*Arizona SWAT Team Raid Goes Bad Officer Down Shot 17 Times (Raw Videos)*





Knock on the door? Really?

----------


## DonGlock26

> Don, talking to users is like talking to  a wall.  One would think they could see the writing on the wall, but maybe they are blinded by a drug induced stupor.


You know, the 'Merican pot heads and coke heads in the 'burbs fund the gangs and Mexican cartels with their cash.

----------


## Matt

> The mothers behavior with regards to her children has no bearing on the matter.


Actually I would say the issue has massive bearing on the issue and certainly plays a huge part. Lets forget the police for a moment, and the incident, and lets take out all of the variables people are upset about in this thread. Taking a child into a drug house is still endangering a child and quite frankly is criminally negligent. Taking everything in this thread aside...if that parent had been seen by someone, reported to child services, and the police never involved, she would have lost her kids in less than 24 hours. I'm not really going to get into the cop thing, been there, done that, and this forum has issues....but the part here claiming the mother's behavior has no bearing blew my mind. Of course it has bearing! It matters a whole lot!! I just had to chime in about that part. I don't care about the cop part of this discussion (don't involve me).

----------

DonGlock26 (05-30-2014)

----------


## Hansel

> You know, the 'Merican pot heads and coke heads in the 'burbs fund the gangs and Mexican cartels with their cash.


If American users would quit buying the damned stuff the cartels might feel the pinch. Sadly it is not only low life punks but some very successful yuppies that spend money on the stuff.

----------

DonGlock26 (05-30-2014)

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/3...ing-drug-raid/
> 
> 19 month old kid in a medically induced coma since cops toss a flash-bang into his crib.
> 
> Quick question...why do cops need that much power to take down ONE drug dealer?
> 
> The war on drugs claims yet another casualty.


The kid was in a drug house. He deserved what was coming to him.

----------


## Dan40

2012,

*What policemen were doing when they were shot to death by the "suspect."
*
Handling mentally ill person. 2

Drug related,  5

Burglary in progress,  1

Robbery in progress,  4

Traffic stop, 10

Domestic disturbance,  4

Attempting arrest,  2

*Ambush,  15
*
I guess our immature children that can't understand authority don't realize that the more the criminals become militarized, the more the police have to be militarized.

But go ahead and wallow in your immaturity.

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

> I guess the criminal-supporters would have rather had the cops get into a gun battle over the crib.


There weren't any criminals there known of. Just some people who allegedly violated some statutes by selling personal property that government declares verboten. I suppose a totalitarian may call that "criminal" since he gets his morality from legislation written by politicians.

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014)

----------


## Invayne

> the more the criminals become militarized, the more the police have to be militarized.


After all, pot smokers and 80 year old vets on pain killers are driving these now...oh wait.

----------


## RMNIXON

> The situation is this:
> 
> The streets of our cities are war zones no less than Fallujah or Aleppo.  The criminals are getting increasingly powerful and sophisticated weaponry.   The criminal gangs are really an insurgency using the same tactics as the Taliban.  This includes hiding behind families, women and children.   The police are responding to these changes.   Americans haven't yet recognized what these changes mean.




Without making any excuses for this police action (because I would like to know all the facts and circumstances first) some of the attitudes expressed in this thread seriously bother me.

Oh the Baby must have been a threat to armored police? Lets all make light of that so I can prove how righteous I am......... 

What about parents not having a crib infant in the middle of a criminal gang drug operation?

----------

DonGlock26 (05-30-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> After all, pot smokers and 80 year old vets on pain killers are driving these now...oh wait.



That's the Feds- Department of Homeland Security.

----------


## DonGlock26

> If American users would quit buying the damned stuff the cartels might feel the pinch. Sadly it is not only low life punks but some very successful yuppies that spend money on the stuff.


'Mericans Dopers ain't giving up their dope. It's what makes their loser lives bearable.

----------


## DonGlock26

> There weren't any criminals there known of. Just some people who allegedly violated some statutes by selling personal property that government declares verboten. I suppose a totalitarian may call that "criminal" since he gets his morality from legislation written by politicians.


Dude, just renounce your citizenship and you won't have to obey laws.

----------


## DeadEye

> Apparently so.  But I can't help but wonder....how long before they go 'too far'?   I suspect there's a lot of people (not just me) out there that have had enough of these kind of stories and see where it's all headed.


They have already gone too far. What they are doing is teaching the drug dealer is that their life is worthless which may lead him to no other choice but to fight back. Fear is a terrible thing and it makes men do things that are unconscionable in a normal atmosphere.

----------


## DeadEye

> It was a search warrant.
> 
>  Ok, you don't like no knock warrants of drug houses. You should join the police reserves and volunteer to take the point.


I'm beginning to think you are a clown. If I took point your ass would be in the fucking back. way back and when I got back to base your ass would be before the CO for retraining before you would ever be on my team.

----------


## DonGlock26

> I'm beginning to think you are a clown. If I took point your ass would be in the fucking back. way back and when I got back to base your ass would be before the CO for retraining before you would ever be on my team.


IF is the operative word. Go volunteer. Hug a thug today. Show the cops how it is done.

----------


## DeadEye

> And, if they knock on the door and get blasted in the face with an AK-47, are you writing the letter to the widows? Are you accepting responsibility for the gunfight afterwards and all the rounds exchanged?


You are so caught up in the military aspects of it that you fail to see there are other ways to handle the situation. As long as you and yours insist on using military tactics the more likely there is to be the potential for massive violence.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014),michaelr (05-30-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> You are so caught up in the military aspects of it that you fail to see there are other ways to handle the situation. As long as you and yours insist on using military tactics the more likely there is to be the potential for massive violence.


Like what? You pop out of a cake?

 Lace your boots up and join the police reserves. They need new guys to knock on the doors of drug houses.

----------


## michaelr

> You are so caught up in the military aspects of it that you fail to see there are other ways to handle the situation. As long as you and yours insist on using military tactics the more likely there is to be the potential for massive violence.


Like you said, their training is bad. What used to be horrific acts by the cops has become normalized. People are becoming indoctrinated into accepting a totalitarian and militarized police state. It will not work in this country.

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014),Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## DeadEye

> Don, talking to users is like talking to  a wall.  One would think they could see the writing on the wall, but maybe they are blinded by a drug induced stupor.


For god's sake. the baby was not a user and a police officers duty is to protect life. Not say oh what the fuck about the child, their parents where criminals. Do either one of you understand how narcissistic that is?

----------


## DeadEye

> Actually I would say the issue has massive bearing on the issue and certainly plays a huge part. Lets forget the police for a moment, and the incident, and lets take out all of the variables people are upset about in this thread. Taking a child into a drug house is still endangering a child and quite frankly is criminally negligent. Taking everything in this thread aside...if that parent had been seen by someone, reported to child services, and the police never involved, she would have lost her kids in less than 24 hours. I'm not really going to get into the cop thing, been there, done that, and this forum has issues....but the part here claiming the mother's behavior has no bearing blew my mind. Of course it has bearing! It matters a whole lot!! I just had to chime in about that part. I don't care about the cop part of this discussion (don't involve me).


Generally speaking you are correct but it does not have any bearing on the subject of excessive force by police officers.

----------


## DeadEye

> IF is the operative word. Go volunteer. Hug a thug today. Show the cops how it is done.



Who in their right fucking mind would volunteer to be a part of the NWO of Marxist bastards who thinks the state has the right to do what it damned pleases in the name of the law?

----------


## Devil505

> Because a lot of times, the drug dealers (also drug users) come out shooting and cops get killed.  But still, they should be using non-injurious types of weapons like tear gas.  And why a "flash bang grenade"?  Whatever happened to knocking down the door and demanding that everyone come out with their hands up....and THEN if the cops get fired on....and only then, use the other weapons.  It does seem like overkill.  *I suppose Dev could shed some light on that "why".*


We (DEA) never surround a house & demand the occupants come out because the drug evidence is to easy to dispose of down the drain & into the city sewer system.
We'd always enter as fast as we could to control the occupants & seize whatever evidence we could find. (drugs, guns, cash, address/telephone books, sale logs, etc)

I've heard of long/involved cases where we'd have the city put a trap on the sewer pipe coming from the house.....if we had plenty of time to set up an operation like that before the raid.(very rare because many times the perps would pack up & move to another location before the trap was completed))

----------

Sheldonna (05-30-2014)

----------


## Devil505

> You are so caught up in the military aspects of it that you fail to see there are other ways to handle the situation. As long as you and yours insist on using military tactics the more likely there is to be the potential for massive violence.


Those military-type tactics often save lives. (both the good & bad guy's lives)
If we have time to set up a raid properly we would always try to hit the house/apt in the wee hours of the night when hopefully everyone is asleep & we can control the situation before they fully wake up & potentially get their weapons & focus. (Thankfully most raids don't involve shootings......most, not all.)

----------


## Devil505

It seems to me many of your arguments in this thread would be better delivered to your Reps in Congress.
They write the laws & we carry them out..,,honorably for the most part & to the best of our abilities. Most cops have families themselves & are not the cold-blooded killers that I think many of you picture .....& news stories are often not accurate or don't tell the whole story.

I have 3 daughters & have had 2 dogs most of my married life.
The thing that always scared me the most kicking down a door was the thought of shooting an innocent person or even a dog (luckily that never happened to me or my group ever throughout my career)

I'm in favor of legalizing all drugs at this point as prohibition simply doesn't work & is counter-productive.

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014)

----------


## DeadEye

> Those military-type tactics often save lives. (both the good & bad guy's lives)
> If we have time to set up a raid properly we would always try to hit the house/apt in the wee hours of the night when hopefully everyone is asleep & we can control the situation before they fully wake up & potentially get their weapons & focus. (Thankfully most raids don't involve shootings......most, not all.)


I understand the need for proper tactics when entering a residence. My contention is that in home raids are not always necessary nor prudent. It is much easier to apprehend a suspect in the open than in a residence where he has access to weapons and ammo. If one is to choose the ground it is best to choose the high ground.

----------


## Victory

I'd like to hear the justification of this.




So, what do we have here?  What will be the justification?

It's the media.  They aren't telling you the whole story.It's emotional.The innocent family shouldn't have been staying at that house.  It's their fault for having criminal friends.The cops didn't know a 19 month old was in the house.It was all done according to procedures.  Sometimes bad stuff like this happens.

Forget about the media.  Forget about the fact that they tell you one thing and not the whole story.  We know that like the back of our hand.  Forget about all the second hand, emotionally driven, half stories that you think are going on here.  Peel it all away and pitch it.  What's left?  What facts remain?

The fact is a 19 month old little boy is in a coma because a police grenade went off in his face.  The fact is the police have admitted to doing it.

Is this the price we have to pay for security?  Sweeping the streets clean of meth dealers means every once in a while a baby has to catch a grenade in the face, is that it?  And what will happen to the cops that did it?  Oh, there will be an investigation alright.  You betcha.  And when the investigation shows that everything was done according to procedure and the cops are aquitted. . .then what?  Aquittal means nothing morally was wrong here?  Is that just the way the cookie crumbles?  Sucks to be the little toddler?  Oh effing well?

When does a mistake become criminal negligence?  When does that criminal negligence become manslaughter?  When do the procedures become such a horrific tragedy that people demand the ousting of a police chief or a sheriff who approves procedures that results in a bomb going off in a baby's face?  Are these procedures tolerable?

I'd really like to hear the "Don't judge too quickly" and the "You don't have the whole story" and "They might have been on PCP" justifications for this one.

----------


## fyrenza

Two Thangs :

1)  ToTaLLy OffTopic, but this thread was started at 1234, today?
How freakin' cool is ^THAT?^

2)  Has anyone said :  When they start rolling tanks out on us, in our homes?

----------


## DonGlock26

> Who in their right fucking mind would volunteer to be a part of the NWO of Marxist bastards who thinks the state has the right to do what it damned pleases in the name of the law?


I figured you'd never use your own tactics in the real world. You might get yourself killed.

----------


## DeadEye

> Two Thangs :
> 
> 1)  ToTaLLy OffTopic, but this thread was started at 1234, today?
> How freakin' cool is ^THAT?^
> 
> 2)  Has anyone said :  When they start rolling tanks out on us, in our homes?


They already did that with a Jesus freak in Texas. Don't think they won't do it again but this time it will be more massive and destructive. Given enough time, the Marxist will be using drones and the excuse for collateral damage will be that they were living in a drug neighborhood.

----------


## Katzndogz

The founding fathers knew this kind of thing was a possibility.  That's why John Adams said that the Constitution was written ONLY for a moral and religious people.  It was totally unsuited for any other.  We no longer have a moral or religious people.  We have a people increasingly divided between prey and violent predator.  What you can't quite get is that the more violent the predator, the more violent the forces have to be to combat those predators.

----------


## DonGlock26

Duplicate thread:

http://thepoliticsforums.com/threads...er-militarized

----------


## DeadEye

> I figured you'd never use your own tactics in the real world. You might get yourself killed.


Life is full of risk. Unlike some, I am not afraid to die and know enough about human nature to limit the necessity for violence.

----------


## DeadEye

> The founding fathers knew this kind of thing was a possibility.  That's why John Adams said that the Constitution was written ONLY for a moral and religious people.  It was totally unsuited for any other.  We no longer have a moral or religious people.  We have a people increasingly divided between prey and violent predator.  What you can't quite get is that the more violent the predator, the more violent the forces have to be to combat those predators.


There is truth in that. Yet, the constitution simply does not recognize morality as the guiding principle by which this nation shall be governed.

----------


## Devil505

> I understand the need for proper tactics when entering a residence. My contention is that in home raids are not always necessary nor prudent. It is much easier to apprehend a suspect in the open than in a residence where he has access to weapons and ammo. If one is to choose the ground it is best to choose the high ground.


DEA is tasked to go after high-level drug dealers & cartels. These guys don't walk the streets with kilos of heroin or cocaine on them or even in their vehicles usually.
The evidence is almost always stashed in a home, apartment, warehouse or some safe & often well protected location.
Raids are the only way we can usually do the job that Congress (You) orders us to do.

That's why DEA has a lot off animosity against the FBI.
From our vantage point, we see them coming in *after the crime* & not have to go undercover like we do to become part of it as a buyer.
Then, they wear suits & ties while they interview witnesses, gather evidence & when they arrest someone... they get to pick the exact circumstance advantageous to them.
We have a much dirtier job & often the perps get to choose the terms we meet them on.
These are some of the thing we bring up in panel interviews with applicants seeking to be Special Agents. Our type of LE work is much different than most other federal LEO's & many applicants want no part of it. (I guess they are the sane ones!)<G>

----------


## fyrenza

> Don, it is the tactics that come into question. The what if's are bullshit. So much for *recon.* I do not have a hard on for LE but in my opinion you can not apply the same tactics we use in war with the civilian population.....if you do apply such tactics you better have your shit wired correctly and in this case LE was a soup sandwich.
> 
> Fact is this tactic in some cases was against ROE.


THAT freaks me out ~

they're the freakin' POLICE, ffs!

Don't they KNOW who all lives there?

Couldn't it wait, a day or two, to figure it out?

THAT is pure aggression ~ just striking out, and consequences be damned,

and is THE way that innocent folks get killed, maimed and/or traumatized.

I'm just ... sickened
to think that our public servants 
that we depend upon to be our protectors,

wouldn't take the 1 or 2 days necessary to figure out if they were

KILLING

the "right" folks.

And, hey, while I'm thinking about it,

WHEN did ^that^ become the #1 Job of LE???

Storming some home, 
laying waste to everything in their path,
and being given a "do-over"
and/or paid vacay to get over the trauma

of KILLING innocent folks?

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014),Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## Network

When they shutdown a city for a drillhoax




Or this:

----------


## DonGlock26

> Life is full of risk. Unlike some, I am not afraid to die and know enough about human nature to limit the necessity for violence.


Then, go join up and show them how it is done fearlessly. Don't even wear a vest. Just walk right up to the house where the armed suspect is and knock away. You're not afraid.

----------


## Sheldonna

> We (DEA) never surround a house & demand the occupants come out because the drug evidence is to easy to dispose of down the drain & into the city sewer system.
> *We'd always enter as fast as we could* to control the occupants & seize whatever evidence we could find. (drugs, guns, cash, address/telephone books, sale logs, etc)
> 
> I've heard of long/involved cases where we'd have the city put a trap on the sewer pipe coming from the house.....if we had plenty of time to set up an operation like that before the raid.(very rare)


That makes logical sense.  Thanks.

----------


## Network

They are preparing for when the sky literally falls. It has all been written and the insiders know what's coming. The sun will stop rotating inside of the earth and melt the ice attached to the glass sky.

Large megacryometeors will fall and devastate an entire continent. Chaos will ensue.

----------


## DeadEye

> Then, go join up and show them how it is done fearlessly. Don't even wear a vest. Just walk right up to the house where the armed suspect is and knock away. You're not afraid.


Please refrain from being so damned factitious. I have plainly stated how I would have handled it and it would not involve a military type action.

----------


## fyrenza

_OUR_ continent???

----------


## Katzndogz

When terrorists in Afghanistan put bomb making factories in residential areas whose fault is it when those residential areas get attacked?  

When terrorists use children as human shields and lob grenades from their position whose fault is it when the children get hurt?  

Whose fault is it that this child was hurt?

----------


## Network

The terrorists are horrible at their jobs.

Worse than killer bees.

I just really want the police to arrest the CEO of Al Qaeda America Inc. Adam Pearlman, who told his terrorists to shoot Americans in the street because guns are so easy to get.

D movie script.

----------


## fyrenza

You know, if you "can't feel anything," to the point that you'd actually consider just murdering innocent folks,

I truly wEnder what you would "feel" while killing them?

Would just be like some target practice game,

and it would never touch you, up close and personal?

----------


## Network

> You know, if you "can't feel anything," to the point that you'd actually consider just murdering innocent folks,
> 
> I truly wEnder what you would "feel" while killing them?
> 
> Would just be like some target practice game,
> 
> and it would never touch you, up close and personal?



You'd have to ask soldiers about that.

----------


## Sheldonna

> They have already gone too far. What they are doing is teaching the drug dealer is that their life is worthless which may lead him to no other choice but to fight back. Fear is a terrible thing and it makes men do things that are unconscionable in a normal atmosphere.


There is a right way and a wrong way to 'go into' someone's house and seize or search for drugs.  If they harm anyone in that process.....*if they are not fired upon*....then they have done it the exact wrong way.  On the other hand, if the druggies offer up lethal resistance, the cops have every right to go  in shooting and to not stop shooting until the threat is eliminated.

----------


## Network

Why keep attacking the symptoms instead of the source, Aluminazi saturnworshipping culture creators, who promote criminal behavior and all of the greed, lust, and me-me-me that leads to corrupt individuals.

----------


## Calypso Jones

This is AWFUL.  WHAT In the HELL is GOING ON??

----------


## Calypso Jones

These people should not be playing soldier in a civilian situation.    Swat teams should be disbanded if they can't do any damn better than this.

----------

fyrenza (05-30-2014),Invayne (05-30-2014),Victory (05-30-2014)

----------


## JB

> The situation is this:
> 
> The streets of our cities are war zones no less than Fallujah or Aleppo.  The criminals are getting increasingly powerful and sophisticated weaponry.   The criminal gangs are really an insurgency using the same tactics as the Taliban.  This includes hiding behind families, women and children.   The police are responding to these changes.   Americans haven't yet recognized what these changes mean.


I don't think you recognize that 99% of the rest of us will not tolerate any of this shit - from the cops or the criminals. This isn't Fallujah no matter how you spin it.

----------

fyrenza (05-30-2014),Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## DeadEye

> You know, if you "can't feel anything," to the point that you'd actually consider just murdering innocent folks,
> 
> I truly wEnder what you would "feel" while killing them?
> 
> Would just be like some target practice game,
> 
> and it would never touch you, up close and personal?


You feel happy and accomplished that the mission came off with no loss of life on your side. That's how ya feel, I know because that was how I felt when rousting Vietnamese from their homes. Someone once said you would have to destroy the village to save it.

"It became necessary to destroy the village in order to save it."  An American major after the destruction of the Vietnamese Village Ben Tre

----------


## Victory

> This is AWFUL.  WHAT In the HELL is GOING ON??


My thoughts exactly.

We need to realize that there is something deeply deeply wrong in America and the cops are moving to the vanguard.  I'm not talking about the usual suspects in Washington passing the dumbest legislation known to man.  I'm talking about the possibility that we may be less than a year away from our own "Night of the Long Knives."  Cops more than anybody need to wake up to this very real possibility.  If/when it happens it will be cops at the business end of that kind of enforcement.

Put yourself five years in the future.  I'd hate for anybody, especially cops, to think, "Damn!  I should have stopped that when I could!"

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014)

----------


## fyrenza

> You feel happy and accomplished that the mission came off with no loss of life on your side. That's how ya feel, I know because that was how I felt when rousting Vietnamese from their homes. Someone once said you would have to destroy the village to save it.
> 
> "It became necessary to destroy the village in order to save it."  An American major after the destruction of the Vietnamese Village Ben Tre


If you have to actually KILL folks

to teach them some "lesson?"

No.

And I was speaking of the civilian killers, roaming our streets,

not the military,

who perform a DUTY,

not just to satisfy some blood lust,

or look for the Next Thang in High Experiences.

----------


## Victory

> Terrell said that _during a prior arrest_ on drug charges, investigators discovered Thometheva had weapons, including an AK-47.


Translation:  NO AK-47 was suspected of being present at the time of the swat raid.

----------


## Victory

> I guess the criminal-supporters would have rather had the cops get into a gun battle over the crib. 
> 
> Why did the mother have a baby in a drug house? Was meth being cooked there? What responsibility does she have to keep her baby out of drug houses?
> 
> It sucks that this happens and I hope the baby makes a full recovery. Kids don't belong in meth labs or drug houses.


I totally telegraphed your response.  Blame the mother.

And what about the cops?  Paid vacation?  A little retraining perhaps?  No biggie, right?  It was the mom's fault, right?

----------


## Victory

> Because drug dealers shoot through doors and AK-47 rounds will go into the neighbor's houses too.


Well, thank God they used a grenade to keep everybody safe!

No AK-47s were even suspected of being present.  That is a shameful excuse and a distraction away from the point that the cops fucked up big time.

----------


## DeadEye

> If you have to actually KILL folks
> 
> to teach them some "lesson?"
> 
> No.
> 
> And I was speaking of the civilian killers, roaming our streets,
> 
> not the military,
> ...


Killing is incidental to the mission. If it happens, as often it did, one felt very little remorse. Especially the longer you were in country and witnessed the death and injury of your buddies. Death becomes us all at some point but I think there are better ways to enforce the law without violence. I am not saying that is always true just that it is another way. Thugs should be shot if the situation calls for it.

----------

fyrenza (05-30-2014),Rudy2D (05-30-2014)

----------


## Victory

> The situation is this:
> 
> The streets of our cities are war zones no less than Fallujah or Aleppo.  The criminals are getting increasingly powerful and sophisticated weaponry.   The criminal gangs are really an insurgency using the same tactics as the Taliban.  This includes hiding behind families, women and children.   The police are responding to these changes.   Americans haven't yet recognized what these changes mean.


Does any of what you wrote sound like a lead up to a "Night of the Long Knives" American style?

----------


## Devil505

> I'd like to hear the justification of this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, what do we have here?  What will be the justification?
> 
> It's the media.  They aren't telling you the whole story.It's emotional.The innocent family shouldn't have been staying at that house.  It's their fault for having criminal friends.The cops didn't know a 19 month old was in the house.It was all done according to procedures.  Sometimes bad stuff like this happens.
> 
> ...


Well said & powerful!
All I can say is most of us do a tough dangerous job as morally & honorably as we can & tragedies like what happened to that baby keep many of us up at night.

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014)

----------


## DeadEye

> Well said & powerful!
> All I can say is most of us do a tough dangerous job as morally & honorably as we can & tragedies like what happened to that baby keep many of us up at night.


As it should keep one up all night and may it never leave ones brain so as to be a constant reminder that there must be a better way.

----------


## Devil505

> As it should keep one up all night and may it never leave ones brain so as to be a constant reminder that there must be a better way.


That way will have to come from Congress because there is simply no foolproof way to enforce the laws the people legislate without the chance of tragedy occurring & more often then not that tragedy hits us & our families as well.

Legalize drugs & most of this bloodshed disappears instantly.

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014),DonGlock26 (05-31-2014),Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## DeadEye

> That way will have to come from Congress because there is simply no foolproof way to enforce the laws the people legislate without the chance of tragedy occurring & more often then not that tragedy hits us & our families as well.
> 
> Legalize drugs & most of this bloodshed disappears instantly.


I agree, yet there will still be bloodshed with organized crime, thugs and psychopaths.  Oh,, and don't forget the dairy farmer.  :Tongue20:

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014),Victory (05-30-2014)

----------


## Devil505

> There is a right way and a wrong way to 'go into' someone's house and seize or search for drugs.  If they harm anyone in that process.....*if they are not fired upon*....then they have done it the exact wrong way.  On the other hand, if the druggies offer up lethal resistance, the cops have every right to go  in shooting and to not stop shooting until the threat is eliminated.


Let me tell you something....we never know what we'll face on the other side of that door.
DOJ trains all its agents to keep their finger out of the trigger housing to give you that extra half-second for your brain to decide if you need to shoot.

Doors & stairs are the biggest dangers to raiding parties because they are blind choke points & there is no foolproof way to breach them for a LEO. (soldiers in combat can toss anti-personell grenades or fire blindly to eliminate blind threats like that...... LEO's can't.)

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014),Sheldonna (05-30-2014)

----------


## Sheldonna

> Let me tell you something....we never know what we'll face on the other side of that door.
> DOJ trains all its agents to keep their finger out of the trigger housing *to give you that extra half-second for your brain to decide if you need to shoot*.


And split-second hesitations can get you killed.  That's what I most worry about re: a potential future home invasion.  Would I hesitate to pull the trigger just long enough to get myself killed?  Without proper (recent) training, I probably would.  Haven't been to the range in years...and haven't had any weapons training (CCL) since 2008.

----------


## Devil505

> And split-second hesitations can get you killed.  That's what I most worry about re: a potential future home invasion.  Would I hesitate to pull the trigger just long enough to get myself killed?  Without proper (recent) training, I probably would.  Haven't been to the range in years...and haven't had any weapons training (CCL) since 2008.


Constant practice in realistic scenarios is a must.

----------


## Sheldonna

> Constant practice in realistic scenarios is a must.


How?  And how much would that cost  someone like me (retired and on a fixed income)?

----------


## Victory

> That way will have to come from Congress because there is simply no foolproof way to enforce the laws the people legislate without the chance of tragedy occurring & more often then not that tragedy hits us & our families as well.
> 
> Legalize drugs & most of this bloodshed disappears instantly.


You can't rely on Congress to do the right thing.

It's up to INDIVIDUAL cops to refuse to do bad shit.  If they can't refuse and if they offer up lame excuses like, "Just doin' my job," then a Night of the Long Knives is in our future.

----------


## Victory

> I agree, yet there will still be bloodshed with organized crime, thugs and psychopaths.  Oh,, and don't forget the dairy farmer.


Exactly!  Legalize drugs and you still have "criminals" like the former "Rawsome Foods" who will try to sell you the most natural of all food only to have 13 agencies from the FDA and USDA to the FBI raid the place with AR-15s.

Let us not be duped into thinking this is a problem with drug laws.  This is a problem with most laws.  This is a problem with the use of police.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## fyrenza

> You can't rely on Congress to do the right thing.





> It's up to INDIVIDUAL cops to refuse to do bad shit. If they can't refuse and if they offer up lame excuses like, "Just doin' my job," then a Night of the Long Knives is in our future.




Wasn't ^that^ what made the Vietnam vets so ... disowned?

It wasn't just the gov that we expected to be accountable;

it was them, personally, too.

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

Looks like that same taskforce took out this innocent pastor. He didn't understand that government is God to the progressives and their enforcers, and acting like Jesus and ministering to "bad" people can get you rightfully and justly killed.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...cs-task-force/

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

> Don, talking to users is like talking to  a wall.  One would think they could see the writing on the wall, but maybe they are blinded by a drug induced stupor.


It's totalitarians versus people who value freedom. You believe, fundamentally, that whatever government sets a rule is ethically right and to violate that rule is unethical. On the other side, we believe that right and wrong and ethics comes before government, and therefore all human beings act rightly or wrongly regardless of what government rules say. Yours is the thinking that got hundreds of millions killed in the last century simply because they were considered undesirable by their governments. So, if it feels like you are talking to a wall, I consider that a good thing. It means that more people today are willing to take a stand against your particular brand of totalitarianism.

----------

DeadEye (05-30-2014),Invayne (05-31-2014)

----------


## Devil505

> You can't rely on Congress to do the right thing.
> 
> It's up to INDIVIDUAL cops to refuse to do bad shit.  If they can't refuse and if they offer up lame excuses like, "Just doin' my job," then a Night of the Long Knives is in our future.


The vast majority of the cops & agents I worked with don't do "Bad Shit" & you can't refuse to kick down doors and remain a DEA agent for long.
Most of the bad guys we went after were pretty bad dudes where selling drugs was just part of their criminal repertoire of murder for hire, armed robbery & outright terrorism.

We rarely targeted street level dealers unless we were targeting their suppliers & needed info/informants. (CI's)

----------


## Devil505

> Exactly!  Legalize drugs and you still have "criminals"


Translation: Why find a cure for cancer when heart disease & diabetes will still be around. (absurd argument)

----------


## squidward

> Kids don't belong in meth labs or drug houses.


we should toss grenades on 'em.

----------


## Devil505

> It's totalitarians versus people who value freedom. You believe, fundamentally, that whatever government sets a rule is ethically right and to violate that rule is unethical.


"Government" is not some evil creature that just appears out of the sea.
"We the people" are the government & the laws you hate so much are written by people we elect to represent us.
This hatred of government is self-hatred in essence.

----------


## squidward

> It's totalitarians versus people who value freedom. You believe, fundamentally, that whatever government sets a rule is ethically right and to violate that rule is unethical. On the other side, we believe that right and wrong and ethics comes before government, and therefore all human beings act rightly or wrongly regardless of what government rules say. Yours is the thinking that got hundreds of millions killed in the last century simply because they were considered undesirable by their governments. So, if it feels like you are talking to a wall, I consider that a good thing. It means that more people today are willing to take a stand against your particular brand of totalitarianism.


they only cry when the law works against them.

----------


## Devil505

> What you can't quite get is that the more violent the predator, the more violent the forces have to be to combat those predators.


Overwhelming & quickly applied force saves lives.

----------

DeadEye (05-31-2014)

----------


## Devil505

*




 Originally Posted by Victory


Translation: NO AK-47 was suspected of being present at the time of the swat raid.


*



> Well, thank God they used a grenade to keep everybody safe!
> *No AK-47s were even suspected of being present.*  That is a shameful excuse and a distraction away from the point that the cops fucked up big time.


Your argument is patently absurd & flies in the face of your earlier post where you posted:
*Terrell said that during a prior arrest on drug charges, investigators discovered Thometheva had weapons, including an AK-47.*



Of course the cops had to be worried that he would still have access to automatic weapons. Why wouldn't they be?

----------


## Calypso Jones

> You feel happy and accomplished that the mission came off with no loss of life on your side. That's how ya feel, I know because that was how I felt when rousting Vietnamese from their homes. Someone once said you would have to destroy the village to save it.
> 
> "It became necessary to destroy the village in order to save it."  An American major after the destruction of the Vietnamese Village Ben Tre


 @Anonymous.  I have nothing but respect for our military....especially our guys putting their lives on the line, not so much the decision makers sometimes.  But tell me please, where is the sense in saying 'you gotta destroy a village to save it'.  And what do you think of that??  To  me it sounds absolutely ludicrous.....but I didn't serve in VietNam.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Your argument is patently absurd & flies in the face of your earlier post where you posted:
> *Terrell said that during a prior arrest on drug charges, investigators discovered Thometheva had weapons, including an AK-47.*
> 
> 
> 
> Of course the cops had to be worried that he would still have access to automatic weapons. Why wouldn't they be?


Since when are 19 month old toddlers expendable?   We are led to believe the police do their homework with all this technology in order to protect the innocent.  BULL SHIP.    They care less than any communist in their own lands.  This is NOT AMERICA.  WE DIDN"T USED TO DO SUCH ATrocities.  There is no excuse for this.   NONE.

----------

DeadEye (05-31-2014),Invayne (05-31-2014)

----------


## Devil505

> Since when are 19 month old toddlers expendable?


I don't remember arguing that they were.






> We are led to believe the police do their homework with all this technology in order to protect the innocent.  BULL SHIP.    They care less than any communist in their own lands.  This is NOT AMERICA.  WE DIDN"T USED TO DO SUCH ATrocities.  There is no excuse for this.   NONE.


Police are humans & humans make mistakes.
Want to absolutely prevent these things from happening?
1. Hire cops from the planet where Mr. Spock was born. (Vulcan I believe)
2. Abolish all law.

----------


## DeadEye

> @Anonymous.  I have nothing but respect for our military....especially our guys putting their lives on the line, not so much the decision makers sometimes.  But tell me please, where is the sense in saying 'you gotta destroy a village to save it'.  And what do you think of that??  To  me it sounds absolutely ludicrous.....but I didn't serve in VietNam.


There was no sense in it. We rousted mostly old men, women and children. Yes, many times Charlie had stashes of weapons and many times he was hiding out in the bush. Still not justification for what we done to those people. When a young man, just barely 20 first sees this the natural tendency is too say this is wrong yet we were told to burn their hooch's and destroy the food. So, you do as you are told. I didn't like it anymore than they did. Yet, if one is in country long enough one excepts it as the way things are. I was never proud of what I done but war is hell and sometimes it seemed we were doing the devils work. I think all war is the devils work but that's just me.

----------

Invayne (05-31-2014)

----------


## DeadEye

> "Government" is not some evil creature that just appears out of the sea.
> "We the people" are the government & the laws you hate so much are written by people we elect to represent us.
> This hatred of government is self-hatred in essence.


No, we are not the government and have very little input as to the workings of government. Government is a 2 edged sword, it can be a great force for good but mostly it is used for bad.

----------

Sheldonna (05-31-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> we should toss grenades on 'em.


If you want to believe that the police threw a flashbang into a crib on purpose that's your "issue".

----------

DeadEye (05-31-2014),Devil505 (05-31-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> Please refrain from being so damned factitious. I have plainly stated how I would have handled it and it would not involve a military type action.


YOU aren't knocking on the doors.

----------


## DonGlock26

> You feel happy and accomplished that the mission came off with no loss of life on your side. That's how ya feel, I know because that was how I felt when rousting Vietnamese from their homes. Someone once said you would have to destroy the village to save it.
> 
> "It became necessary to destroy the village in order to save it."  An American major after the destruction of the Vietnamese Village Ben Tre


You raided villages knowing that children would be there? Why didn't you refuse?

----------


## DonGlock26

> My thoughts exactly.
> 
> We need to realize that there is something deeply deeply wrong in America and the cops are moving to the vanguard.  I'm not talking about the usual suspects in Washington passing the dumbest legislation known to man.  I'm talking about the possibility that we may be less than a year away from our own "Night of the Long Knives."  Cops more than anybody need to wake up to this very real possibility.  If/when it happens it will be cops at the business end of that kind of enforcement.
> 
> Put yourself five years in the future.  I'd hate for anybody, especially cops, to think, "Damn!  I should have stopped that when I could!"


You think the Obama admin will start murdering political opponents within a year? You may be on to something. 
Have you started a threat about what you think Obama is going to do?

----------


## DonGlock26

> I totally telegraphed your response.  Blame the mother.
> 
> And what about the cops?  Paid vacation?  A little retraining perhaps?  No biggie, right?  It was the mom's fault, right?


Yeah, taking your baby into a dangerous place is your fault.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Well, thank God they used a grenade to keep everybody safe!
> 
> No AK-47s were even suspected of being present.  That is a shameful excuse and a distraction away from the point that the cops fucked up big time.


A grenade? Do you mean a distraction device?

----------


## DonGlock26

> there must be a better way.


When you had your chance in Vietnam, why didn't you come up with a better way or at least not become deadly towards civilians? 

If you want to berate the police that threw a flashbang into a drug den, then you open yourself up to questioning about your village raids.

----------


## Devil505

> No, we are not the government and have very little input as to the workings of government. Government is a 2 edged sword, it can be a great force for good but mostly it is used for bad.


If I bought that argument, which I don't.....who is to blame for that and is it time to commit suicide because there's no hope??

----------


## DonGlock26

> That way will have to come from Congress because *there is simply no foolproof way to enforce the laws the people legislate without the chance of tragedy occurring & more often then not that tragedy hits us & our families as well.*
> 
> Legalize drugs & most of this bloodshed disappears instantly.


Well, that's just common sense, which isn't all that common. The police raided the drug house and used a distraction device because of the threat level. A dirtbag mother happened to have her child in there. It's a tragedy, but the mother put her child in harm's way.

----------

Devil505 (05-31-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> You can't rely on Congress to do the right thing.
> 
> It's up to INDIVIDUAL cops to refuse to do bad shit.  If they can't refuse and if they offer up lame excuses like, "Just doin' my job," then a Night of the Long Knives is in our future.


Most people don't want meth dealers in their neighborhoods. You may, but they don't.

----------


## Devil505

> there is simply no foolproof way to enforce the laws the people legislate without the chance of tragedy occurring *& more often then not that tragedy hits us & our families as well.*


Attachment 3935
http://www.justice.gov/dea/about/wall-honor/wall-of-honor.shtml

----------


## DonGlock26

> It's totalitarians


Listen, Kenneth, this is not a totalitarian nation because we have drug laws. The police got a search warrant and served it.

They used a distraction device and not a room clearing grenade. No one was executed for being a drug dealer by the police without trial.

Your rhetoric does a real disservice to people in real totalitarian countries. 

Is the federal gov't too big and growing oppressive? I think so. Are you taking to far with your emotional rhetoric? Yes.

----------


## DeadEye

> You raided villages knowing that children would be there? Why didn't you refuse?


Cause a young man of 20 doesn't know any better or doesn't want to know. All I knew and understood was that my buddies was the only ones I could rely on and no matter how much empathy one had for those villagers they would kill you if they had half a chance.

----------


## DeadEye

> If I bought that argument, which I don't.....who is to blame for that and is it time to commit suicide because there's no hope??


No to suicide because there is always hope. Those who deserve the blame are those who swore an oath to uphold the constitution.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Since when are 19 month old toddlers expendable?   We are led to believe the police do their homework with all this technology in order to protect the innocent.  BULL SHIP.    They care less than any communist in their own lands.  This is NOT AMERICA.  WE DIDN"T USED TO DO SUCH ATrocities.  There is no excuse for this.   NONE.


You are right about the being led to believe part. Who is leading you? The mainstream media. Do they have an agenda? Are they profiting from this tragedy, if they make a big deal out of it and inflame people?

Did we have meth dealers with AK-47's in the 50's? America has become a moral toilet, since the Left's social revolution of the 1960's. If the people become less moral and more chaotic, then the gov't will have to use more force to maintain the peace. Personally, I hate the Left for what they have done to my country.

----------

Sheldonna (06-03-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> There was no sense in it. We rousted mostly old men, women and children. Yes, many times Charlie had stashes of weapons and many times he was hiding out in the bush. Still not justification for what we done to those people. When a young man, just barely 20 first sees this the natural tendency is too say this is wrong yet we were told to burn their hooch's and destroy the food. So, you do as you are told. I didn't like it anymore than they did. Yet, if one is in country long enough one excepts it as the way things are. I was never proud of what I done but war is hell and sometimes it seemed we were doing the devils work. I think all war is the devils work but that's just me.


You had your chance to say no. You didn't do it and it sounds like you did much worse than throw a flashbang into a drug house. Are you projecting your guilt on these cops?

----------


## DeadEye

> When you had your chance in Vietnam, why didn't you come up with a better way or at least not become deadly towards civilians? 
> 
> If you want to berate the police that threw a flashbang into a drug den, then you open yourself up to questioning about your village raids.


Fair enough. I did come up with a better way. I got the fuck out when my tour was up. Of course at that point I didn't have much choice in the matter. My soldiering days were over.

----------


## DonGlock26

> No, we are not the government and have very little input as to the workings of government. Government is a 2 edged sword, it can be a great force for good but mostly it is used for bad.


If you aren't voting for, at least, the candidates for smaller gov't, you are part of the problem.

----------


## Devil505

> Personally, I hate the Left for what they have done to my country.


Both sides are to blame not just the Left.

----------

DeadEye (05-31-2014)

----------


## DeadEye

> You had your chance to say no. You didn't do it and it sounds like you did much worse than throw a flashbang into a drug house. Are you projecting your guilt on these cops?



Maybe on some psychological plain but mostly I was trying to convey what happens when procedures are followed by men.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Cause a young man of 20 doesn't know any better or doesn't want to know. All I knew and understood was that my buddies was the only ones I could rely on and no matter how much empathy one had for those villagers they would kill you if they had half a chance.


Men refuse to do those things at 20 years of age. It sounds like you have a lot of guilt over this. IMHO- you are mixing apples and oranges.

The police did their job as they normally do in a high risk drug raid. Sadly, a mother put her child in harm's way. They were not making war on civilians as you did.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Fair enough. I did come up with a better way. I got the fuck out when my tour was up. Of course at that point I didn't have much choice in the matter. My soldiering days were over.


You did what you perceived as wrong until you could stop safely without risking military punishment for yourself. Yet, you are critical of the police for throwing a distraction device into a drug house because they wanted to prevent a possible firefight.

Do you see the moral problem there?

----------


## DonGlock26

> Both sides are to blame not just the Left.


No, the Left owns the social revolution and the resulting chaos.

----------


## DeadEye

> Men refuse to do those things at 20 years of age. It sounds like you have a lot of guilt over this. IMHO- you are mixing apples and oranges.
> 
> The police did their job as they normally do in a high risk drug raid. Sadly, a mother put her child in harm's way. They were not making war on civilians as you did.


Sure they are and I think it could have been handled differently.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Maybe on some psychological plain but mostly I was trying to convey what happens when procedures are followed by men.


War is ugly. This wasn't war. It's not even close. If a soldier thought  an armed VC was in a hut or bunker, he would have probably fragged it and thought nothing of the possibility of children being in it. 

Yet, here you are being critical of the police who have to go into drug houses, with dangerous armed drug dealers, for throwing in what amounts to a large firecracker.

So, lets say they did it your way and a gunfight happened killing the baby and the mother. You'd be okay with that? What if you found out that they had flashbangs, but didn't use them? You'd defend the cops for not using the flashbangs?

----------


## DonGlock26

> Sure they are and I think it could have been handled differently.


Yes, and things could have gone wrong as well and you would still be critical of them.

----------


## Devil505

> No, the Left owns the social revolution and the resulting chaos.

----------


## Calypso Jones

I agree with all you guys.   BUT, perhaps it is the fault of the entertainment industry (tv, film, games) that we have the idea that our law enforcement people are careful, reasonable, superhuman and have all types of technical gizmos that would PREVENT SUCH A THING HAPPENING.   yes, I was talking a little louder than usual on those last words but not screaming.  Caps for emphasis only).   I am not prepared to okay any kind of police action that will result in the destruction of Toddlers.  Call me crazy.    

I am also disturbed at the militarization of our police.  Surely there is an alternative.  It's too easy to use on US and this president would have no problem with that...as well as some local sheriff and city police departments in leftist run cities and towns.  I don't like it.  

I don't want meth users around me but neither do I want out of control, GI joe type policemen wreaking havoc willy-nilly.

----------

DeadEye (05-31-2014),Invayne (05-31-2014)

----------


## DeadEye

> War is ugly. This wasn't war. It's not even close. If a soldier thought  an armed VC was in a hut or bunker, he would have probably fragged it and thought nothing of the possibility of children being in it. 
> 
> Yet, here you are being critical of the police who have to go into drug houses, with dangerous armed drug dealers, for throwing in what amounts to a large firecracker.
> 
> So, lets say they did it your way and a gunfight happened killing the baby and the mother. You'd be okay with that? What if you found out that they had flashbangs, but didn't use them? You'd defend the cops for not using the flashbangs?


Thing is, as I have pointed out numerous times, they did not have to go in. They chose to do so. Please stop making this about me. I am more than aware of my short comings as a man.

----------


## Victory

> Translation: Why find a cure for cancer when heart disease & diabetes will still be around. (absurd argument)


Totally out of context.  The "criminals" are false criminals just like the 19 month old little boy.  You left that context out didn't you.

----------


## DonGlock26

> *


Do you have a point?

----------


## DonGlock26

> Thing is, as I have pointed out numerous times, they did not have to go in. They chose to do so. Please stop making this about me. I am more than aware of my short comings as a man.


So what? That's just hindsight. 

You made this about you by bringing up your past. You've shown that when your skin was in the game, you did much more than these cops did and you only stopped when it was safe for yourself to do so. 

Like I said, if they tried to take him down outside and the baby got hurt, you'd still be bitching.

----------


## DonGlock26

> I agree with all you guys.   BUT, perhaps it is the fault of the entertainment industry (tv, film, games) that we have the idea that our law enforcement people are careful, reasonable, superhuman and have all types of technical gizmos that would PREVENT SUCH A THING HAPPENING.   yes, I was talking a little louder than usual on those last words but not screaming.  Caps for emphasis only).   I am not prepared to okay any kind of police action that will result in the destruction of Toddlers.  Call me crazy.    
> 
> I am also disturbed at the militarization of our police.  Surely there is an alternative.  It's too easy to use on US and this president would have no problem with that...as well as some local sheriff and city police departments in leftist run cities and towns.  I don't like it.  
> 
> I don't want meth users around me but neither do I want out of control, GI joe type policemen wreaking havoc willy-nilly.


Using a flashbang to enter a drug house with that kind of suspect is not wreaking havoc willy-nilly. A firefight in that neighborhood could have been much worse.

Real life is not like TV. That's exactly right.

----------


## Devil505

> Do you have a point?


That picture makes it for me. (if you think this problem is only a Left or Right problem you are sticking your head in the sand.

----------


## Victory

> The vast majority of the cops & agents I worked with don't do "Bad Shit" & you can't refuse to kick down doors and remain a DEA agent for long.
> Most of the bad guys we went after were pretty bad dudes where selling drugs was just part of their criminal repertoire of murder for hire, armed robbery & outright terrorism.
> 
> We rarely targeted street level dealers unless we were targeting their suppliers & needed info/informants. (CI's)


A kicked in door is not the problem here.  Stay focused.

And stop hiding behind the "murder, armed robbery, and terrorism" schtick.  Nobody offered their kids up for sacrifice to the god of security to jail drug dealers.

The price is not appropriate for the service.

----------


## Victory

> Using a flashbang to enter a drug house with that kind of suspect is not wreaking havoc willy-nilly. A firefight in that neighborhood could have been much worse.
> 
> Real life is not like TV. That's exactly right.


You're perfectly A-Okay with a toddler catching a grenade in the face.  

That's just the way it goes kid.  Try not to cry too much.  It could have been worse.

Why not just throw in, "Thank you, sir.  May I have another!?"

----------


## Victory

> I agree with all you guys.   BUT, perhaps it is the fault of the entertainment industry (tv, film, games) that we have the idea that our law enforcement people are careful, reasonable, superhuman and have all types of technical gizmos that would PREVENT SUCH A THING HAPPENING.   yes, I was talking a little louder than usual on those last words but not screaming.  Caps for emphasis only).   I am not prepared to okay any kind of police action that will result in the destruction of Toddlers.  Call me crazy.    
> 
> *I am also disturbed at the militarization of our police.  Surely there is an alternative*.  It's too easy to use on US and this president would have no problem with that...as well as some local sheriff and city police departments in leftist run cities and towns.  I don't like it.  
> 
> I don't want meth users around me but neither do I want out of control, GI joe type policemen wreaking havoc willy-nilly.


Shout it from the rooftops, sister!  I'm thinking of the sixties.  People thought the US was ending in the sixties with the protests, demonstrations, and no-shit terrorist activities of the Weather Underground.  And yet. . .we seemed to get through it all without the militarization of the cops.  The police seemed to handle the riots without SWAT teams for credit card fraud and Strykers for Tea Partiers.

Something different is happening here.

----------

Calypso Jones (05-31-2014),DeadEye (05-31-2014),Invayne (05-31-2014)

----------


## Devil505

> A kicked in door is not the problem here.  Stay focused.
> 
> And stop hiding behind the "murder, armed robbery, and terrorism" schtick.  Nobody offered their kids up for sacrifice to the god of security to jail drug dealers.
> 
> The price is not appropriate for the service.


What's *your* solution to law enforcement then.
Since there will never be a perfect way to enforce laws...what do we do?
(how would *you* handle the drug problem in this county & how would *you* advise we remove violent criminals from our streets in a nice clean/antiseptic way)

----------


## Invayne

> Since when are 19 month old toddlers expendable?   We are led to believe the police do their homework with all this technology in order to protect the innocent.  BULL SHIP.    They care less than any communist in their own lands.  This is NOT AMERICA.  WE DIDN"T USED TO DO SUCH ATrocities.  There is no excuse for this.   NONE.


Now why in the world do you think cops are supposed to worry about a strangers' kid when they don't even care about their own?


*Report: Officer Arrested After Holding Gun To 5 Year Old’s Head*

     Posted on: 5:09 am, May 27, 2014, by Meredith Baldwin and Curt Lanning, _updated on: 01:03pm, May 28, 2014_







  A Fort Smith police officer was arrested and placed on administrative  leave Tuesday after Sequoyah County deputies said he fired a gun inside  his home and held a gun to a five-year-old child’s head.

http://5newsonline.com/2014/05/27/au...quoyah-county/


At least this one got a paid vacation before he RESIGNED.....not fired!

----------


## Invayne

Oh yeah, and he answered the door pointing a gun at the officer...see how they take care of their own? And a fucking golf club people get shot and killed for. I suppose the copsuckers on here can justify this somehow. Come on, shills, work for your money....

----------


## Invayne

> When you had your chance in Vietnam, why didn't you come up with a better way or at least not become deadly towards civilians? 
> 
> If you want to berate the police that threw a flashbang into a drug den, then you open yourself up to questioning about your village raids.


You've been listening to Lindsey Graham for too long if you think the streets of Amerika are equal to a war zone.

----------


## Invayne

> If I bought that argument, which I don't.....who is to blame for that and is it time to commit suicide because there's no hope??


Already happened...

----------


## Invayne

> Men refuse to do those things at 20 years of age. It sounds like you have a lot of guilt over this. IMHO- you are mixing apples and oranges.
> 
> The police did their job as they normally do in a high risk drug raid. Sadly, a mother put her child in harm's way. *They were not making war on civilians as you did.*


Holy shit, Don. You are acting lower than snail shit here. WTF is wrong with you?

----------


## St James

> Now why in the world do you think cops are supposed to worry about a strangers' kid when they don't even care about their own?
> 
> 
> *Report: Officer Arrested After Holding Gun To 5 Year Old’s Head*
> 
>      Posted on: 5:09 am, May 27, 2014, by Meredith Baldwin and Curt Lanning, _updated on: 01:03pm, May 28, 2014_
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> A Fort Smith police officer was arrested and placed on administrative leave Tuesday after Sequoyah County deputies said he fired a gun inside his home and held a gun to a five-year-old child’s head.
> Officer Naaman Adcock was placed on administrative leave with pay while authorities conduct an internal investigation. Sequoyah County authorities said they took nine guns from Adcock’s possession after he fired off several rounds into a wall inside his home after he got into a drunken dispute with his wife.
> Adcock was arrested on suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon, possession of a firearm while intoxicated, reckless conduct with a firearm, felonious pointing a firearm and child endangerment, according to the Sequoyah County Sheriff’s Office.
> Adcock’s wife Tabatha was also arrested. She faces charges of failure to protect a child, child endangerment, possession of a firearm while intoxicated and reckless conduct with a firearm.
> Investigators said both of the suspects fired a gun inside the house with at least two children inside. They were booked into the Sequoyah County Jail following their arrests. Naaman Adcock’s bond was set at $24,000, while Tabatha Adcock’s bond is $14,000, according to the Sheriff’s Office.
> The incident happened just off of U.S. 64-B near the Long community around 2:30 a.m., according to Sequoyah County deputies.
> One of the children inside the home ran to a neighbor’s house for help immediately after hearing the gunshots, dispatchers said. Neighbors then called police, according to authorities.
> While on the way to the Adcocks’ home, deputies stopped a blue SUV traveling away from the residence. Driving the vehicle was Tabatha Adcock. When she was questioned about the gunshots, she said that she and her husband had been shooting tires in the yard, and that everything was fine, according to an incident report.
> The report states Tabatha Adcock was observed to be visibly upset. She kept wringing her hands and stuttering. The report also states that another deputy questioned Adock’s two children who were also in the car.
> ...


Currently OUT of jail...........If anyone else had answered the door with a pistol in their hands, they would have blown away, but because he's a boy in blue, he deserves extra Rights. And since he's a fucking pig, he deserves every break he can get including full legal coverage from the Union of Thugs. 
Now, I'm sure some in here will rush to this animal's defense and say something stupid like, it wasn't his fault, he simply has "issues" ...however, we need to beat up the elderly

----------

Invayne (05-31-2014)

----------


## Sheldonna

> No, we are not the government and have very little input as to the workings of government. Government is a 2 edged sword, it can be a great force for good but mostly it is used for bad.


Which is WHY most Republicans (not RINOs) always push for less government....vs. the always pushing for more government that leftist DemocRats, currently in majority control of government, are insisting on.

----------


## St James

> What's *your* solution to law enforcement then.
> Since there will never be a perfect way to enforce laws...what do we do?
> (how would *you* handle the drug problem in this county & how would *you* advise we remove violent criminals from our streets in a nice clean/antiseptic way)


Shit, son who was the violent one here? The drunken sot held a pistol to the child's head and you're already off and running to this guy's defense....
I'm so sure it was just a minor thing, eh? He didn't really do that, it was simply a misunderstanding.
Oh, go blow it out yer *&*

----------

fyrenza (05-31-2014)

----------


## Calypso Jones

An innocent toddler fighting for his life at this point is 'pretty much worse'.

----------

fyrenza (05-31-2014)

----------


## Victory

> You think the Obama admin will start murdering political opponents within a year? You may be on to something. 
> Have you started a threat about what you think Obama is going to do?


What have YOU done to reduce the number of innocents caught in the crossfire?

Not a damn thing I bet.

----------


## St James

hell, I suspect he's loading the guns for 'em

----------


## Roadmaster

> What have YOU done to reduce the number of innocents caught in the crossfire?
> 
> Not a damn thing I bet.


 The sad part was the guy they were looking for wasn't even home at the time of the raid is what I hear.

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

> What's *your* solution to law enforcement then.
> Since there will never be a perfect way to enforce laws...what do we do?
> (how would *you* handle the drug problem in this county & how would *you* advise we remove violent criminals from our streets in a nice clean/antiseptic way)


Drug use should be handled like any other form of societal issue - by families, neighbors, friends, etc. 

As far as violent criminals, if the drug war ended along with the myriads of other laws that criminalize non-criminal behavior, then there would be far less need for police and the standards for hiring could be raised much higher.

----------

Devil505 (06-01-2014)

----------


## Victory

> What's *your* solution to law enforcement then


Sell all the APCs, Strykers, and MRAPS in a public auction to civilians only.  They are totally unneeded in police departments.  End fire sales of these items from the fed government to local law enforcement.Jail time for the authorization of warrantless lock downs like the one that happened in Boston.Reduction in police departments in general with elected sheriff's departments picking up the slack only as required.Disarm the FDA, USDA, Parks and Rec, IRS, Social Security, and every department that has "armed up" over the last 6 years.Custody, not paid vacation, for cops under investigation of brutality, excessive force, and manslaughter, like that in the OP.Jail time for authorities who authorize SWAT raids for credit card fraud and other non-violent crime.

and I'm thinking about preserving "innocent until proven guilty" by presuming the cop with the flash grenade is guilty until proven innocent since he is the government representative here.  Guilty until proven innocent may be appropriate here since we're not talking about civilian on civilian violence.  We're talking about government force on obviously innocent civilians.  America has always been suspicious of government power since its founding so let's not be too freaked out by continuing that healthy suspicion of government power by considering the government killers guilty until they can prove themselves innocent.

----------

DeadEye (05-31-2014),fyrenza (05-31-2014)

----------


## Victory

> The sad part was the guy they were looking for wasn't even home at the time of the raid is what I hear.


Yeah.  OOPS!  Oh well.  Sorry 'bout the mess.

----------


## DonGlock26

> What have YOU done to reduce the number of innocents caught in the crossfire?
> 
> Not a damn thing I bet.


What are you babbling about now?

----------


## DonGlock26

> That picture makes it for me. (if you think this problem is only a Left or Right problem you are sticking your head in the sand.


Explain how the social decay is a right wing problem? The conservatives have been the Resistance movement.





@Devil505

----------


## DonGlock26

> You're perfectly A-Okay with a toddler catching a grenade in the face.  
> 
> That's just the way it goes kid.  Try not to cry too much.  It could have been worse.
> 
> Why not just throw in, "Thank you, sir.  May I have another!?"


No, but that is a nice strawman. The mother should do time for putting her baby in a drug house.

----------


## DonGlock26

> You've been listening to Lindsey Graham for too long if you think the streets of Amerika are equal to a war zone.


It's not a war zone. The cops didn't frag the room nor did they burn the village.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Holy shit, Don. You are acting lower than snail shit here. WTF is wrong with you?


I shouldn't point out what he already copped to? Copped? Get it?  :Smiley ROFLMAO: 

I think critics should grow a pair and a thicker skin.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Shit, son who was the violent one here? The drunken sot held a pistol to the child's head and you're already off and running to this guy's defense....
> I'm so sure it was just a minor thing, eh? He didn't really do that, it was simply a misunderstanding.
> Oh, go blow it out yer *&*


Who's running to his defense??? If he did what the media says he did, he should be going to prison.

----------


## Invayne

> It's not a war zone. The cops didn't frag the room nor did they burn the village.


No shit it's not a war zone. So why the "If you want to berate the police that threw a flashbang into a drug den,  then you open yourself up to questioning about your village raids" comment? Stop trolling people over their experiences in war. Not. The. Same. Thing.

----------


## DonGlock26

> No shit it's not a war zone. So why the "If you want to berate the police that threw a flashbang into a drug den,  then you open yourself up to questioning about your village raids" comment? Stop trolling people over their experiences in war. Not. The. Same. Thing.


I didn't bring it up. He did. But, since he did, the MMQB opened himself up to discussion.

----------


## Invayne

> I shouldn't point out what he already copped to? Copped? Get it? 
> 
> I think critics should grow a pair and a thicker skin.


And you should probably stay on topic and quit bringing up others' personal lives that have nothing to do with the topic.

----------


## DonGlock26

> And you should probably stay on topic and quit bringing up others' personal lives that have nothing to do with the topic.


Listen, Church Lady, go bake something. Men are talking here. Anon can take it. He's got a set. I'll give him that.

----------

DeadEye (06-01-2014)

----------


## Invayne

> Listen, Church Lady, go bake something. Men are talking here. Anon can take it. He's got a set. I'll give him that.


I never thought he didn't. I'm just saying your behavior is not very...flattering. LOL!

----------


## Devil505

> Explain how the social decay is a right wing problem? The conservatives have been the Resistance movement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @Devil505


Explain what the GOP has ever done to stop social decay?

----------


## DeadEye

> Listen, Church Lady, go bake something. Men are talking here. Anon can take it. He's got a set. I'll give him that.


I don't particularly like it but hey, you got the right and I wouldn't begrudge you that. Sometimes though, I get the impression that you are trying to inflame people with your overblown rhetoric.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Explain what the GOP has ever done to stop social decay?


They've opposed progressive Democrats. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_war

----------


## DonGlock26

> I don't particularly like it but hey, you got the right and I wouldn't begrudge you that. Sometimes though, I get the impression that you are trying to inflame people with your overblown rhetoric.


Yeah, I mean everyone is nice to me and respects my opinion. They even apologize, when I disprove their OP articles with facts about the cases.  I just don't pay them back with similar respect.

----------


## DonGlock26

> I never thought he didn't. I'm just saying your behavior is not very...flattering. LOL!


Next time someone calles me a name, I want you to stalk them for a day or two. Mmmm kay?

----------


## Sled Dog

> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/3...ing-drug-raid/
> 
> 19 month old kid in a medically induced coma since cops toss a flash-bang into his crib.
> 
> Quick question...why do cops need that much power to take down ONE drug dealer?
> 
> The war on drugs claims yet another casualty.


Yet another example of why the police should only be allowed guns on a case-by-case basis determined by the courts.




> There was no clothes, no toys, nothing to indicate that there was children present in the home, Darby said. If there had been, then wed have done something different.


There's no reason to believe this.   They tossed the grenade in without even knocking on the door.  They cared so little about the innocent bystanders they didn't even bother to ask if there were any.

The judge should be prosecuted for complicity in this illegal and unconstitutional assualt on a child.



You'll note that when the cops had that Christopher Dorner corned in a home in Big Bear they IMMEDIATELY turned to incendiary grenades to MURDER him, making absolutely no effort to WAIT, even though, being surrounded by dozens of such manly men, (ahem), Dorner no longer posed a threat to the public the cops were supposedly sworn to protect.

The cops, however, STILL had the duty to protect the property of the people Dorner had kidnapped, and yet those cops committed an act of deliberate arson to murder Dorner.

Cops do not need any of the following as a part of their routine gear:

More than six bullets.
Shotguns.
Rifles.
GRENADES
TANKS
ARMED AIRCRAFT/DRONES...which they do not have..YET.

If advanced armament is required for a particular situation, a court order should be required to release it, or maybe simply authority from very high up on the police force's chain of command, so that a chain of legal RESPONSIBILITY is captured for any criminal use of those weapons.

----------

DeadEye (06-01-2014),fyrenza (06-01-2014),Invayne (06-01-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> I guess the criminal-supporters would have rather had the cops get into a gun battle over the crib. 
> 
> Why did the mother have a baby in a drug house? Was meth being cooked there? What responsibility does she have to keep her baby out of drug houses?
> 
> It sucks that this happens and I hope the baby makes a full recovery. Kids don't belong in meth labs or drug houses.


Yeah, typical fascist blame the victim shit here.

The COPS have EVERY responsibility to use force with judgement and care...because ALL persons are presumed innocent.

Under NO circumstances should the COPS EVER be allowed to play Police State in the United States.  

Too damn bad if the cops find themselves more at risk if they have to announce their presence in advance.  Nobody asked them to volunteer for the job, if they don't like the risks incumbent upon them to protect the innocent, they should quit.

If they can't serve a warrant on a person that isn't there without almost killing a baby, then they shouldn't serve the warrant.

Methamphetamine is, as Jesse Pinkman noted, a poison purchased by people WHO DO NOT CARE.  Why then should it be illegal and banned to the point where the cops are murdering people who aren't involved?  Not only do the people who take the meth don't care, NOBODY cares about them.  Let them take their poison in peace.   Let them die in peace.

If it wasn't a criminal activity, there'd be no guns for the cowardly little police bullies to be afraid of....and the friggin' PIGS wouldn't be tossing grenades into playpens.

----------

DeadEye (06-01-2014),fyrenza (06-01-2014),Invayne (06-01-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> Yeah, typical fascist blame the victim shit here.
> 
> The COPS have EVERY responsibility to use force with judgement and care...because ALL persons are presumed innocent.
> 
> Under NO circumstances should the COPS EVER be allowed to play Police State in the United States.  
> 
> Too damn bad if the cops find themselves more at risk if they have to announce their presence in advance.  Nobody asked them to volunteer for the job, if they don't like the risks incumbent upon them to protect the innocent, they should quit.
> 
> If they can't serve a warrant on a person that isn't there without almost killing a baby, then they shouldn't serve the warrant.
> ...



The vicitm is the baby. The mother is the one who put her baby in a dope house. She endangered her baby.

I've seen nothing to say that they didn't use judgement and care. They wanted to avoid a gunfight in a neighborhood.

If there had been a shootout and kids were killed, I'm sure you would be patting the cops on the back for doing it your way.

----------


## Corruptbuddha

_Everybody was asleep. Its not like anyone was trying to fight.


Inexcusable._

----------


## Invayne

> Next time someone calles me a name, I want you to stalk them for a day or two. Mmmm kay?


What in the world are you talking about?

----------


## Invayne

> ALL persons are presumed innocent.


That shit went out the window years ago. Welcome to the New Amerika.

----------

DeadEye (06-01-2014)

----------


## Devil505

> Cops do not need any of the following as a part of their routine gear:
> 
> More than six bullets.
> Shotguns.
> Rifles.
> 
> If advanced armament is required for a particular situation, a court order should be required to release it, or maybe simply authority from very high up on the police force's chain of command, so that a chain of legal RESPONSIBILITY is captured for any criminal use of those weapons.


How about the first cops who responded to this crime?

----------


## Devil505

> Cops do not need any of the following as a part of their routine gear:
> 
> More than six bullets.
> Shotguns.
> Rifles.
> 
> If advanced armament is required for a particular situation, a court order should be required to release it, or maybe simply authority from very high up on the police force's chain of command, so that a chain of legal RESPONSIBILITY is captured for any criminal use of those weapons.


Or this one: (good hollywood reenactment)

----------


## fyrenza

> The vicitm is the baby. The mother is the one who put her baby in a dope house. She endangered her baby.
> 
> I've seen nothing to say that they didn't use judgement and care. They wanted to avoid a gunfight in a neighborhood.
> 
> If there had been a shootout and kids were killed, I'm sure you would be patting the cops on the back for doing it your way.


Not to be so In-Your-Face, but ~

if and If and IF are not valid arguments against the facts.

What you're saying is that an innocent baby,
because of it's place/time of birth and mother

DESERVED what happened to it...


(You're not ~ there's some sort of logical fallacy in what I said,
but do you see how that works,
and how YOU can get wrapped around some axle of invalid supposition?)

----------

BleedingHeadKen (06-01-2014)

----------


## fyrenza

> How about the first cops who responded to this crime?
> 
> [video]





> Or this one: (good hollywood reenactment)
> [video]


Which have what to do with what, in this thread?

If you have some "Rah, Rah, Sis Boom Bah" police vids to put up,
this thread is not the place ~
go make a new thread.

You might be amazed about how many of us are not cop haters, at all,
and DO value the true service that our LE provide to us/US,

but I'll be GAWD damned if I sit back and just slide my gaze away from some of the excesses,

and/or *choose* to ignore this horrifying trend,

where TOTALLY INNOCENT FOLKS get maimed, traumatized and/or KILLED

by the folks that I'm PAYING to "Protect The Innocent and Preserve The PEACE."

----------

DeadEye (06-01-2014),Invayne (06-01-2014),Sled Dog (06-02-2014)

----------


## Devil505

> Which have what to do with what, in this thread?


Take a look at the post I was directly responding to in post #209.

----------


## Devil505

> They've opposed progressive Democrats. 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_war


Mindless/kneejerk response.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Not to be so In-Your-Face, but ~
> 
> if and If and IF are not valid arguments against the facts.
> 
> What you're saying is that an innocent baby,
> because of it's place/time of birth and mother
> 
> DESERVED what happened to it...
> 
> ...


NO, I'm saying that the mother is responsible for putting her child in a very dangerous place.




> Neglect
> 
> 
> Neglect is frequently defined as the failure of a parent or other 
> person with responsibility for the child to provide needed food, 
> clothing,* shelter*, medical care, or supervision to the degree 
> that the child’s health, *safety*, *and well-being are threatened* 
> *with harm.*
> 
> ...

----------


## DonGlock26

> Mindless/kneejerk response.


Who hates the Religious Right? Progressives.

----------


## fyrenza

> Take a look at the post I was directly responding to in post #209.


No.




(i'm feeling onery.)

----------


## fyrenza

> NO, I'm saying that the mother is responsible for putting her child in a very dangerous place.


But ^that's^ saying that it's just the baby's tough shit,

and regardless of IT'S innocence,

it shall just be considered a part of the problem, also.

The baby wasn't "the problem,"
nor was it, in and of itself, guilty of anything.

^THAT's^ exactly, *precisely* the "innocent" that I'd want PROTECTED,

AT ALL COSTS!

----------

BleedingHeadKen (06-01-2014),DeadEye (06-01-2014)

----------


## fyrenza

If a peaceable police(wo)man loses their lives,

I'll GLADLY pay what we contracted for, in that instance,

AND then some,

along with prayers and as much moral support as I could be.

But here's the deal :

The job description is pretty explicit,
and no one walks into some Bait And Switch-type situation 
when they decide to make Law Enforcement their career/profession,

and as horrible as this is,
it's the job they agreed to do,
for all of us/US.

----------


## DonGlock26

> But ^that's^ saying that it's just the baby's tough shit,
> 
> and regardless of IT'S innocence,
> 
> it shall just be considered a part of the problem, also.
> 
> The baby wasn't "the problem,"
> nor was it, in and of itself, guilty of anything.
> 
> ...


No, the mother put her baby in harm's way. That was the mother's job, right? To protect her baby *AT ALL COSTS!*

----------


## DonGlock26

> http://www.11alive.com/story/news/lo...enade/9751475/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The sheriff did arrest the suspect, 30-year-old Wanis Thomethera, along with three others. He said his deputies interviewed the parents, who told them that the suspect is a relative, and that the family only recently moved in with him because their house in Wisconsin burned.
> 
> 
> *"They [told us they] knew that the homeowner's son was selling meth, so they kept the children out of sight in a different room while any of these going-ons were happening,"* Terrell said. "So when [our confidential informants] did go up and buy drugs at the house, they didn't see any evidence of children in the home."
> ...


Why did the first home burn? Were they cooking meth?

If this is true, they likely moved the crib or playpen to a different room before the informant bought meth. 

_

----------


## Victory

> Why did the first home burn? Were they cooking meth?
> 
> If this is true, they likely moved the crib or playpen to a different room before the informant bought meth. 
> 
> _


Speculation???  From you???  Oh perish the thought!

----------

St James (06-02-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> The vicitm is the baby. The mother is the one who put her baby in a dope house. She endangered her baby.
> 
> I've seen nothing to say that they didn't use judgement and care. They wanted to avoid a gunfight in a neighborhood.
> 
> If there had been a shootout and kids were killed, I'm sure you would be patting the cops on the back for doing it your way.


Here's some homework for you:

Figure out WHO tossed the grenade without knowing where it would land or who it would harm.

THOSE are the guilty and responsible parties for nearly killing that child.

They didn't use judgement and care.  They lobbed a grenade into a playpen.

If there had been a shoot-out, and kids were killed, you could set your little strawman pants on fire.    In that situation, the cops would be responsible for any children injured with their own bullets, just like Clinton was responsible for murdering those men woman and children he gassed at Waco before incinerating them.

----------


## Sled Dog

> That shit went out the window years ago. Welcome to the New Amerika.


That's because the so-called "conservatives" refuse to recognize that "law and order" does not mean "cops are never wrong".   Too many of them are too stupid to recognize that the uniform does not define the law.  Those idiots give their blind support to jack-booted thugs walking all over THEIR OWN liberties.   In many ways, they're almost as stupid as the Stupids that vote Rodent.

----------

Invayne (06-02-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> How about the first cops who responded to this crime?


Since the cops have proven over and over and over again that they cannot be trusted with firepower, they should be treated no differently that Paul Blart, Mall Cop. 

If their trusty six-shooter isn't man enough for the job, they get to call it in and wait for their superiors to show up and SUPERVISE THEM with bigger weapons.

Meanwhile, because we already know that cops are never around when you want one, and that when seconds count the cops are just minutes away, the basic human right of gun ownership should not be denied to anyone not in prison or a mental hospital or a state or national legislature.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Or this one: (good hollywood reenactment)


You Rodents are always justifying the most extravagant abuses of government power with the slogan "if it saves just one life, it's worh it"  (except when murdering unborn babies, - and we're noting what side you're coming down on in this thread, for the grenade tossing baby-maiming cops...), and the evidence is in: 

It will save lives if we disarm the cops and stop the cop arms race.

----------


## Sled Dog

> NO, I'm saying that the mother is responsible for putting her child in a very dangerous place.


Yes, the mother is responsible for any injury her child may have received FROM EXPOSURE TO THE NASTY CHEMICALS USED TO MAKE METH.

The COPS are responsible for throwing a grenade in the child's face.

----------


## Victory

> No, but that is a nice strawman.


No straw man.  These are your words:




> Using a flashbang to enter a drug house with that kind of suspect is not wreaking havoc willy-nilly.* A firefight in that neighborhood could have been much worse.*


THAT is a straw man!  The reader is supposed to knock down your hollow straw man (a firefight that never happened and is purely wishful thinking so you can make your point) while you switch it out for the real man (a toddler with a grenade to the face).  We're supposed to thank our lucky stars that a firefight didn't happen when 1) it could have happened anyway if the toddler didn't get hurt and the suspect was home and 2) since the suspect *wasn't* at home, the grenade was useless in preventing a firefight later on in the day.  Bringing up the possibility of a firefight is a total and complete distraction--knock down the real blame by knocking down the hollow man.  Ain't gonna work.

You should know what a straw man is before you use it.

----------

Sled Dog (06-02-2014)

----------


## Micketto

> Yes, the mother is responsible for any injury her child may have received FROM EXPOSURE TO THE NASTY CHEMICALS USED TO MAKE METH....


Or from storing illegal assault weapons... or from not answering the door when called by police... or from living in a house with a drug addict/cooker/dealer, with assault weapons...etc. etc. etc.



You left it unfinished.
You're welcome.

----------

DonGlock26 (06-02-2014)

----------


## Micketto

> Cause a young man of 20 doesn't know any better or doesn't want to know.


So cops at age 20 or younger can do these things and you guys won't whine and cry?   
Is 20 the maximum age?  22?  27?

Where does the excuse you used end... ?

----------


## Micketto

> Next time someone calles me a name, I want you to stalk them for a day or two. Mmmm kay?


Lol... no sht

----------

DonGlock26 (06-02-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> Speculation???  From you???  Oh perish the thought!


Questions in search of answers.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Here's some homework for you:
> 
> Figure out WHO tossed the grenade without knowing where it would land or who it would harm.
> 
> THOSE are the guilty and responsible parties for nearly killing that child.
> 
> They didn't use judgement and care.  They lobbed a grenade into a playpen.
> 
> If there had been a shoot-out, and kids were killed, you could set your little strawman pants on fire.    In that situation, the cops would be responsible for any children injured with their own bullets, just like Clinton was responsible for murdering those men woman and children he gassed at Waco before incinerating them.


What grenade? 

The idea of looking into a room before throwing the distraction device seems to defeat the purpose of the distraction device. I guess you would be fine with a gunfight over the crib by the front door?

The dirtbag mother who put the baby in a dope house is responsible. 

They did use judgement. The risk of a distraction device was less than the risks of a gun battle. 

It wasn't a grenade. 

You WANTED the cops to risk a gun battle.

----------


## DonGlock26

> That's because the so-called "conservatives" refuse to recognize that "law and order" does not mean "cops are never wrong".   Too many of them are too stupid to recognize that the uniform does not define the law.  Those idiots give their blind support to jack-booted thugs walking all over THEIR OWN liberties.   In many ways, they're almost as stupid as the Stupids that vote Rodent.


Since when does a cop hater care about the law? I'm pretty sure frequenting a drug house, cooking meth, selling meth, and taking a baby into a drug house are all illegal acts. But, the cop haters could care less about those laws being broken prior to the incident.

----------


## Invayne

So many shills, so little time. LOL!

----------


## Invayne

Hey, here's a good question....

----------

Sled Dog (06-02-2014)

----------


## Roadmaster

> Since when does a cop hater care about the law? I'm pretty sure frequenting a drug house, cooking meth, selling meth, and taking a baby into a drug house are all illegal acts. But, the cop haters could care less about those laws being broken prior to the incident.


 Where does it say they were manufacturing meth at the house.

----------


## Roadmaster

What the media left out. The baby was in the garage not the house. Does this make a difference well sort of. They should know their surrounding at all times but I guess they didn't expect a baby to be there.

----------


## Victory

> What the media left out. The baby was in the garage not the house. Does this make a difference well sort of. They should know their surrounding at all times but I guess they didn't expect a baby to be there.


Garage or garage converted into an extra bedroom?

And why would the cops throw a grenade into a conventional garage inhabited supposedly by no suspects at 2am?

----------

BleedingHeadKen (06-03-2014)

----------


## Victory

> Questions in search of answers.


Questions in search of a vigilante cop.

The first home burned down in Wisconsin.  You advocating cops from Georgia passing judgement on something that happened in Wisconsin?

----------


## DonGlock26

> Questions in search of a vigilante cop.
> 
> The first home burned down in Wisconsin.  You advocating cops from Georgia passing judgement on something that happened in Wisconsin?


Questions in search of answers. You should try having a critical mind instead of being spoon fed by the media. Pathetic.

Just tear your latest strawman apart in private. Don't ask, don't tell.

----------


## Victory

> Questions in search of answers. You should try having a critical mind instead of being spoon fed by the media. Pathetic.
> 
> Just tear your latest strawman apart in private. Don't ask, don't tell.


You don't know what a straw man is.

----------


## DonGlock26

> You don't know what a straw man is.


Oh, great comeback.   :Gay:

----------


## Victory

> Oh, great comeback.


Whatever.




> Why did the first home burn? Were they cooking meth?





> The first home burned down in Wisconsin.  You advocating cops from Georgia passing judgement on something that happened in Wisconsin?


So what's the answer, Crockett?

----------


## DonGlock26

> Whatever.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what's the answer, Crockett?


Why would they pass judgement, when they can read the police and fire dept reports? Is Monday amateur night for the cop haters?

----------


## Sled Dog

> Or from storing illegal assault weapons... or from not answering the door when called by police... or from living in a house with a drug addict/cooker/dealer, with assault weapons...etc. etc. etc.
> 
> 
> 
> You left it unfinished.
> You're welcome.



No.  I do not accept re-edits from my inferiors.  IF you wish to submit your own opinions to the board, do so by applying your own name to them, do not presume to ride on the coat tails of your betters.

My post was finished when I clicked the "SUBMIT" button.

----------


## Sled Dog

> What grenade?


The flash-bang gadget is a "grenade".

English isn't a complicated language.  You are personally lucky that you are being corrected by a native speaker.




> The idea of looking into a room before throwing the distraction device seems to defeat the purpose of the distraction device. I guess you would be fine with a gunfight over the crib by the front door?


One ceases to wonder at the shortage of food in the world and the rising inflation in food prices in the U.S.A when one realizes the IMMENSE ACREAGE you people devote to growing straw for your strawman arguments.

----------


## Sled Dog

> Since when does a cop hater care about the law?


When the cops....er  PIGS violate their sworn oaths to protect the innocent and the laws that protect those innocents.

----------

BleedingHeadKen (06-03-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Garage or garage converted into an extra bedroom?
> 
> And why would the cops throw a grenade into a conventional garage inhabited supposedly by no suspects at 2am?


You mean a garage possibly inhabited by a motor vehicle with thirty or forty gallons of gasoline, or maybe just some full jerry-cans of gasoline, just begging for a friendly grenade to have a party?

----------

BleedingHeadKen (06-03-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> What the media left out. The baby was in the garage not the house. Does this make a difference well sort of. They should know their surrounding at all times but I guess they didn't expect a baby to be there.


What the medea left out:

No-knock searches are unconstitutional, something the Founding Fathers, with their experience with the British and THEIR penchant for totalitarian tactics, rejected out of hand.

----------

BleedingHeadKen (06-03-2014),Invayne (06-02-2014)

----------


## Invayne

> You mean a garage possibly inhabited by a motor vehicle with thirty or forty gallons of gasoline, or maybe just some full jerry-cans of gasoline, just begging for a friendly grenade to have a party?


History has shown that cops are not in the least bit worried about burning their victims alive. Probably would've given them a Boehner.

----------

St James (06-02-2014)

----------


## Ghost of Lunchboxxy

I think a very reasonable case can be made that the police ARE now being far too militarized, and I've heard this from people who are VERY pro-cop.

----------


## DonGlock26

> The flash-bang gadget is a "grenade".
> 
> English isn't a complicated language.  You are personally lucky that you are being corrected by a native speaker.
> 
> 
> 
> One ceases to wonder at the shortage of food in the world and the rising inflation in food prices in the U.S.A when one realizes the IMMENSE ACREAGE you people devote to growing straw for your strawman arguments.


Negative.

A grenade is a bomb. A bomb is a weapon designed to kill or maim. A flashbang is a less lethal distraction device. 




> *gre·nade*
> 
> _noun_\grə-ˈnād\: a small bomb that is designed to be thrown by someone or shot from a rifle
> 
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/grenade





> *bomb*
> 
> _noun_\ˈbäm\: a device that is designed to explode in order to injure or kill people or to damage or destroy property
> 
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bomb


Native speaker? Are you from Londonistan? Are you able to speak Urdu in order to converse with an English cab driver?



Your excusing the tortured logic of the cop haters is an exercise in futility.

----------


## DonGlock26

> When the cops....er  PIGS violate their sworn oaths to protect the innocent and the laws that protect those innocents.


Like they knew the baby was in the dope house with the trash mother.

----------


## Invayne

> I think a very reasonable case can be made that the police ARE now being far too militarized, and I've heard this from people who are VERY pro-cop.


Really. NOW you see it now that other copsuckers notice it? Funny.

----------


## DonGlock26

> What the medea left out:
> 
> No-knock searches are unconstitutional, something the Founding Fathers, with their experience with the British and THEIR penchant for totalitarian tactics, rejected out of hand.


Let this native speaker help you out. Medea is a figure in Greek mythology. The media reports the news.

I don't recall reading the term "no knock" in the fourth amendment. The supreme court had upheld the practice.

----------


## DonGlock26

> I think a very reasonable case can be made that the police ARE now being far too militarized, and I've heard this from people who are VERY pro-cop.


You have to wonder why the Obama admin is giving so many armored vehicles to local police depts.

 What are they worried about? We are enjoying the Obama economic recovery (tm).

----------


## OriginalCyn

> No, but that is a nice strawman. The mother should do time for putting her baby in a drug house.





> I guess the criminal-supporters would have rather had the cops get into a gun battle over the crib. 
> 
> Why did the mother have a baby in a drug house? Was meth being cooked there? What responsibility does she have to keep her baby out of drug houses?
> 
> It sucks that this happens and I hope the baby makes a full recovery. Kids don't belong in meth labs or drug houses.





> No, the mother put her baby in harm's way. That was the mother's job, right? To protect her baby *AT ALL COSTS!*





> What grenade? 
> 
> The idea of looking into a room before throwing the distraction device seems to defeat the purpose of the distraction device. I guess you would be fine with a gunfight over the crib by the front door?
> 
> The dirtbag mother who put the baby in a dope house is responsible. 
> 
> They did use judgement. The risk of a distraction device was less than the risks of a gun battle.


Jesus Tapdancing Christ, you need to take a break and chill the fuck out.

After reading this thread and, in particular, your numerous posts, what stands out (quite disturbingly, I might add) is how you leapt to several conclusions about this situation and automatically accused, tried, and convicted the mother of this toddler.

If you bothered to actually read up on this case rather than ramping up the Rah-Rah-Sis-Boom-Bah bullshit cheerleading of the police and how they handled this warrant, there are several points that do, in fact, call their actions into question.

For starters, the home was not a meth lab.  No drugs were manufactured or stored there.  The search of the house following the botched delivery of the warrant came up with -- guess what?  Nada, nil, zilch -- ZERO:  




> The 3 a.m. raid Wednesday in Habersham County unearthed no drugs, no weapons, no bundles of cash and not even the suspect drug dealer.





> [Habersham County Sheriff Joey Terrell] said their undercover agent who bought a small quantity of the drug earlier in the week spotted no evidence of children in the house.
> Terrell acknowledged that the undercover agents only made a single drug buy and that they did not keep surveillance on the house. That might have allowed them to see the house was packed with kids but it also risked revealing that officers were watching the house.


The police acted on a single drug buy at this location from one source with no surveillance done by LE prior to the raid in the middle of the night?!?!  Call me kooky, but serving a no-knock warrant and using a flash-bang grenade was a tad reckless, given the limited amount of info they had.  Perhaps if they done some recon rather than charging in willy-nilly, they would have realized that there was a family with children staying there.

As for your accusations that this mother was reckless,




> Phonesavanh said she and her family had moved to live with her sister-in-law in April after they suffered a fire in Wisconsin. They knew Thonetheva had problems with the law in the past but said they were assured he had straightened his life up and had a job. But they decided it wasnt a good environment and had reserved a U-Haul for Thursday to return to Wisconsin.
> 
> Things were not as good as what we were told, she said.


From what I have gathered from reading this article, the family did not have the financial resources to just pack up and go stay at a hotel -- they were aware of the situation and were getting out of it, 

I am a firm supporter of both the military and LE, but when overzealous police officers and agencies rush to judgement without adequate, concrete intel, shit like this happens.

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/police-...om-says/nf9w6/

ETA:  The family is seeking a federal probe regarding this raid:

http://triblive.com/usworld/nation/6...#axzz33XyET19b

I found this part to be a tad alarming:




> The raid had not been cleared by either the district attorney or the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, despite Habersham County Sheriff Joey Terrell's earlier statements to the contrary, Rickman said. A call to Terrell's office on Monday was not returned.

----------


## Micketto

> My post was finished when I clicked the "SUBMIT" button.


As was your whole argument.

----------

DonGlock26 (06-04-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Negative.
> 
> A grenade is a bomb. A bomb is a weapon designed to kill or maim. A flashbang is a less lethal distraction device.


A flash-bang GRENADE produces an explosion of pyrotechnics.

Ergo, it's a bomb.

Why are you quibbling?

Do you feel that it MAKES A DIFFERENCE that the baby's face was burned off with a flare instead of a bomb? Isn't the real issue that the baby's face was burned off...by so-called "police"?




> Native speaker? Are you from Londonistan? Are you able to speak Urdu in order to converse with an English cab driver?


No.

I speak American.

Just like the native I am.




> Your excusing the tortured logic of the cop haters is an exercise in futility.


Your excusing the COPS for burning the face off a baby is an exercise in hypocrisy.

Next thing we know, you'll be voting DemocRAT.

----------

St James (06-03-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Let this native speaker help you out. Medea is a figure in Greek mythology. The media reports the news.
> 
> I don't recall reading the term "no knock" in the fourth amendment. The supreme court had upheld the practice.


Okay. We can assume that you've never read the Medea, a tragedy written by Euripides in fifth century BC Greece, before they went commie.

Medea was jilted by Jason, and murdered Jason's sons, HER sons, to spite him.

Today's medea is murdering the truth to spite the Americans, because the Americans aren't fucking retarded liberal fascist pigs like 95% of today's "journalists" - a "profession" supposedly dedicated to the truth, not a political viewpoint.

You must have a rough life, not understanding the roots of your own culture and all.

----------

BleedingHeadKen (06-03-2014)

----------


## Sled Dog

> Like they knew the baby was in the dope house with the trash mother.



Like they were supposed to take the due dilligence to ensure they did no harm to any innocents involved.

And, oh, btw..ALL PERSONS are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

They're the COPS.  They ARREST people.  "Arrest" means "stop", it doesn not mean "burn the face of random babies, just because they can".

Cops are allowed to fire their weapons ONLY in self-defense in the presence of a clear and immediately present danger.

These PIGS fired grenades into the windows of a private residence with NO SIGNS WHATSOEVER of weapons in the hands of their victims.    

How dangerous can a baby be, anyway?

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

> Your excusing the tortured logic of the cop haters is an exercise in futility.


Versus the logic of the holster sniffer: "if a cop does it, it must be good because government tells me it is so! Except, Obama!"

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

> Like they knew the baby was in the dope house with the trash mother.


Trash mother? Are you saying that she was the mother of trash? Either you should learn better English, or you are finally admitting what you think of the baby. Which is it?

----------


## DonGlock26

> Jesus Tapdancing Christ, you need to take a break and chill the fuck out.


Yawn......


 :Finger:

----------


## DonGlock26

> A flash-bang GRENADE produces an explosion of pyrotechnics.
> 
> Ergo, it's a bomb.
> 
> Why are you quibbling?
> 
> Do you feel that it MAKES A DIFFERENCE that the baby's face was burned off with a flare instead of a bomb? Isn't the real issue that the baby's face was burned off...by so-called "police"?
> 
> 
> ...



You are the quibbler.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Okay. We can assume that you've never read the Medea, .


I'm not the asshole who doesn't know the difference between Medea and Media.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Like they were supposed to take the due dilligence to ensure they did no harm to any innocents involved.


Like what? The family admits that they knew drugs were being sold there and that they removed the children from the room when the drugs were being sold.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Versus the logic of the holster sniffer: "if a cop does it, it must be good because government tells me it is so! Except, Obama!"


Your cop fetish is........ well disturbing.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Trash mother?


Yes.

________

----------

