Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Member Login

Site Notices
4/18/2021 9:59:29 PM
Posted: 1/26/2021 10:07:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/26/2021 10:14:09 AM EDT by green_bullet]
On strategy to deal with violent crime:  "I'm big proponent of targeting illegal guns, and I think it's imperative that the department be leveraging the intelligence," Shields said. "There's a very strong intelligence section to identify those individuals that we know are violent, repeat offenders who are engaged in bringing illegal guns to the street. Because it sets the tone for a neighborhood. It sets the tone for how the young kids get the guns. So I'm sure there will be some shifts. Exactly what? I don't know, because I haven't seen the 'slow chart' yet."  "The reality is, if you go after illegal guns, you are going after those individuals who are predisposed or have shown a willingness to commit violence. When you get them, you will also roll up into the narcotics. You have to triage it correctly, and I think if you are narcotics focused, you have the inverse model."

Anti-gun because of rhetoric and approach. I dont see a lot of unregistered class-3 items being seized by LMPD. Just go after law breakers and the guns/drugs in the hands of those who shoud not have them should be a byproduct. When you target something, then police will take more liberties in violating rights. There is more pressure to perform to "find the thing" than to "deter the crime". When the focus is on drugs, for example, cops seeing a lot of cash (ie thousands) in your wallet use that as an excuse to suspect drug trafficking, and search your car for drugs. Targeting guns is worse as they also have the claim of "officer safety" to broaden when/how they can lawfully search.

My experience and understanding anyway, anyone else who wishes to clarify or share experiences is more than welcome as I am always open to learn more or adjust my perspective based on new info
Link Posted: 1/26/2021 12:20:46 PM EDT
Originally Posted By green_bullet:
On strategy to deal with violent crime:  "I'm big proponent of targeting illegal guns, and I think it's imperative that the department be leveraging the intelligence," Shields said. "There's a very strong intelligence section to identify those individuals that we know are violent, repeat offenders who are engaged in bringing illegal guns to the street. Because it sets the tone for a neighborhood. It sets the tone for how the young kids get the guns. So I'm sure there will be some shifts. Exactly what? I don't know, because I haven't seen the 'slow chart' yet."  "The reality is, if you go after illegal guns, you are going after those individuals who are predisposed or have shown a willingness to commit violence. When you get them, you will also roll up into the narcotics. You have to triage it correctly, and I think if you are narcotics focused, you have the inverse model."

Anti-gun because of rhetoric and approach. I dont see a lot of unregistered class-3 items being seized by LMPD. Just go after law breakers and the guns/drugs in the hands of those who shoud not have them should be a byproduct. When you target something, then police will take more liberties in violating rights. There is more pressure to perform to "find the thing" than to "deter the crime". When the focus is on drugs, for example, cops seeing a lot of cash (ie thousands) in your wallet use that as an excuse to suspect drug trafficking, and search your car for drugs. Targeting guns is worse as they also have the claim of "officer safety" to broaden when/how they can lawfully search.

My experience and understanding anyway, anyone else who wishes to clarify or share experiences is more than welcome as I am always open to learn more or adjust my perspective based on new info
View Quote


I didn't get that she was anti-gun from the article or any mention about unregistered class-3 items. I think she was referring to illegal guns as originally stolen, straw purchase bought, etc
But coming from a large city with high crime such as Atlanta it wouldn't surprise me if she were anti-gun.

The line that IS concerning is "The reality is, if you go after illegal guns, you are going after those individuals who are predisposed or have shown a willingness to commit violence." This is some Minority Report level shit there and is talking points for red-flag law BS

Comment section has, IMO, a really good comment about crime in the city

Click To View Spoiler


Police can only do so much if the prosecutor drops charges and lets them free to rape/shoot/murder again

My 1 1/2 cent comment
Link Posted: 1/26/2021 12:24:58 PM EDT
She might be anti-gun, but nothing you posted indicates that.  The crime is that haircut.

Link Posted: 1/26/2021 4:49:50 PM EDT
I'm in the Atlanta area and she wasn't particularly anti-gun... mostly low profile trying to clean up... she was sacrificed after a shooting here where one of her officers shot a guy who tried to taser him.. was on the news.. She appeared to be the person they could get rid of while things proceeded towards any criminal or court actions with the officers.
Link Posted: 1/26/2021 10:43:14 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ghost74:
I'm in the Atlanta area and she wasn't particularly anti-gun... mostly low profile trying to clean up... she was sacrificed after a shooting here where one of her officers shot a guy who tried to taser him.. was on the news.. She appeared to be the person they could get rid of while things proceeded towards any criminal or court actions with the officers.
View Quote



Thank you for the perspective
Link Posted: 1/27/2021 2:19:54 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By green_bullet:



Thank you for the perspective
View Quote



You're welcome. I'm keeping an eye on her administration. I'm planning on moving to Pulaski county in the next few months so i'm watching your large departments to see what they are doing.
Top Top