Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 11/1/2001 10:13:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/1/2001 10:39:14 AM EDT by fight4yourrights]
Recent threads here have detailed police abuses with the standard huy and cry "SUE!" & "KNOW YOUR RIGHTS". Well, I don't think that always matters. This guy is "one of us". I would elect him at Police Commissionar of the entire USA based on his attitude of properly enforcing Constitutional law. This is a true story related to me from a former Baltimore police officer. Now this is a guy that knew his rights, but was violated anyway. He attempted legal recourse, but there wasn't any.
[b]Retired Baltimore City Police officer[/b] Baltimore city resident Baltimore, MD June 13, 2000 On May 20th 2000, Police Officers, of the Baltimore City Police Department, unlawfully and illegally took my property, two handguns, from my home in Baltimore City in the State of Maryland, with contempt and in direct violation of the 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 9th amendments of the Constitution of the United States of America. The police, having been called for a trespass violation, did not perform their duties in accordance to the oath of their office in response to my complaint. The police prevented me from moving freely about my home and to talk with my wife, and then did seize, unlawfully and illegally against the guaranteed protections of the U.S. Constitution, personal property, two handguns, that were not a threat to anyone, were not used criminally against anyone, and that are lawfully owned by me. The police were not asked to stay by my wife or me, however the police then did impose themselves and prevent normal conversation between my wife and me, did coerce, intimidate, threaten and by means of duress did compel my wife to nod her head to their demands to search without a warrant our home and then illegally seize my property. The police had no business acting as a barrier against and preventing normal conversation between husband and wife. The police were not called for any other reason then for a trespass violation involving a third party (male relative of wife). The police then, supposedly acting in the interest of my wife, used fear, threats intimidation, coercion and duress against my wife, the person they will claim they were protecting, to compel her to give a nod of agreement to an unlawful and illegal search and seizure of my property in which the police seized two handguns allegedly for safe keeping when there was clearly no unlawful threat made by anyone to anyone regarding this property, this was clearly just an exercise of dominance and an abuse of power by the police with contempt for and in direct violation of the 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 9th amendments of the U.S. Constitution, any so called law repugnant to the U.S. Constitution is no law at all, you would think that the police would be familiar with this. The police filed a report under CC# XX xxxxx, I have not yet obtained a copy of this report, but given the conduct of the police I can only believe the report to be misleading and not at all accurately representative of what actually happened nor was I or my wife asked to verify the accuracy of the report before it became an official record. Now I am instructed, by the police to furnish a notarized explanation of how my property left my possession, if I want the property returned to me, how ridiculous this is. -cont-
View Quote
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 10:14:27 AM EDT
-cont-
[i]I, name with held, am the legal owner of the property seized and I demand it be returned, my property should not have been taken in the first place, no violation of law had been committed that could have been lawfully used/relied upon to take my property![/i] name with held name with held ________________ __________ _______________ __________ The above notarized explanation was required of me in order to get the Baltimore City police department to return my property, two handguns. My wife had decided to leave me. She had not discussed this with me, and I was completely unaware of her intentions to leave. Early on a Saturday morning, the 20 th of May 2000, believe it or not, the anniversary of our first meeting 8 years before, my wife returned home from what was suppose to be a meeting with her brother to help him take care of some personal business (relating to his marital problems). She returned and announced that she was leaving me. Naturally, I was surprised by this announcement. I wanted to understand why she had made this decision without ever talking to me about it. So I was asking her questions. We were not arguing and our voices were not loud. Her brother began yelling upstairs that "sometimes things happen for the best". He continued to interrupt my conversation with my wife. I asked him to stop. He continued. I told him to stop. He continued. I told him that if he could not resist interrupting my conversation with my wife that he should wait outside. He refused and continued to interrupt. I told him to leave, to go out on the front porch. He refused. Did I mention that her brother was at that time separated from his wife, and charged criminally with assaulting his wife. I pointed out to him that he hardly was in a position to give me advise. He was standing about a foot in front of me at this point shouting in my face. Spittle from his shouting at me was landing on my face, and he drew his hand back (clenched in a fist) in a threaten manner. I took a defense stance, knocked him off balance and to the floor, he offered no further hostilities. The police were called and I demanded that her brother be removed from my home for trespassing. When the police learned that my wife was leaving they decided to treat the matter as a domestic disturbance.
View Quote
-cont-
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 10:15:26 AM EDT
-cont-
I had not prevented my wife from leaving. I had not threatened to harm her in any way. I was merely asking her questions about her decision to leave. The police were now preventing me from talking to my wife. The police restricted my movements to the living room only. My wife was upstairs gathering personal items. She opened the top drawer of her bedside night stand. Located inside was my Beretta Cougar 8000 9 mm handgun placed there with her knowledge for her self defense use. A female police officer in the bedroom with her saw the handgun and took it. From downstairs in the living room I could her the action of the handgun being manipulated and knew that it must be my Beretta. The police using intimidation, coercion, threats and duress did compel my wife to nod her head to their demands to search without a warrant. They found and took my Ruger .357 Magnum Speed Six Stainless Steel revolver in my bed side night stand. The police, approx. 8 of them now, surrounded me in my living room demanding to know the where-a- bouts of the rest of my fire arms, stating that if I did not tell them they would get a warrant and tear the house apart in their search for them. Naturally, I refused, and told them "f*ck you get a warrant". Did I mention that I am a retired police officer with the very same police department that was now in my living room utilizing these Gestapo, Nazi-like tactics on me? I would not advise the same course of action to others. The only thing that saved me from a worse fate was that these brown-shirt, Nazi, Gestapo, bastards were apparently sufficiently afraid enough that they might be over stepping their authority (most police are not as knowledgeable as you might think) that I was not pounded to a pulp, arrested and charged with whatever they could think up. For brevities sake I have not included all the exchanges that took place between me and the police, suffice it to say... they continued to threaten me for approx. 20 more minutes and I continued to tell them to go f*ck their selves and get the f*cking warrant if they knew how to write one that a judge would sign. I demanded a supervisor to lodge a supervisors complaint (discourtesy, conduct unbecoming, etc.) against the police involved. The whole time this exchange was taking place in my living room there was in plain site, in my umbrella stand, my Mossberg Maverick, pistol grip, 12 ga shotgun. Before the jack-booted-thug-goons got in my face I casually opened the front door to the point that it concealed the umbrella stand with my 12 ga. I also have, strategically placed through out my house, several handguns, all easily accessible, provided you know where they are, all loaded, and ready to rock & roll. Finally my wife was ready to leave, and so therefore the thugs in blue too. I haven't even mentioned the exchanges that took place regarding the legalities of the police permitting my wife to remove property that I might have disputed her taking. I was ordered to "shut the f*ck up or I'll lock your ass up". Police do not have the authority to allow a person to remove property, they do not, can not, determine ownership etc. .
View Quote
-cont-
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 10:15:57 AM EDT
-cont-
I know what some of you might be thinking... serves him right, now he knows how "we" feel/are treated by some police. All well and good, but I was not that kind of police officer, so the fact that I got the jack-booted-thug routine demonstrated on me served no purpose, nothing will improve by me having been the target of this abuse of power by idiots following orders, the so called domestic violence laws. To those of you who say get a lawyer, well I am still an active member of the FOP, I still pay my dues to retain the benefits, which, one is legal representation. the response I got from the FOP lawyers at the law firm that represents the lodge I belong to is... "I'm not going to sue the people that have been paying me for the past 30 years". I said I am one of those people, my dues pay you. There was no response for a minute or two, and then he said "what do you want me to do?" I replied "sue them for me" he said "I can't do that". I took my story to about a dozen other lawyers/law firms. The ones that were willing to sue on my behalf wanted an initial retainer of $20,000.00 to take the case. I was warned that that was just an initial retainer, the case would likely go much higher, and there were no guarantees that I would win. I did get my handguns back from the efforts of the FOP lawyers. I had to submit the above "notarized explanation of how my property left my possession" in order to get them back. One of the hand guns, the Ruger, I have owned for so long that at the time I purchased it (from another cops father, who was also a cop) it was not a requirement to fill out paper work on private sales so the Ruger was unregistered, ever, no record of any owner ever being registered to the handgun. Before I could get it back I had to register it. Get a lawyer, sure, if you can afford one. I couldn't. Retired, and disgusted. p.s. My wife and I are still together, she came back about 5 months after leaving. One of the main reasons she left... she didn't like the amount of money I was spending on firearms and related equipment
View Quote
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 10:40:55 AM EDT
It was a domestic incident, not a trespass complaint as the poster seems to think. I don't see anything there that would classify it as a trespass complaint.She was trying to leave the relationship and an argument ensued over that. Given the verbal exchanges and the guys admission that he leaves guns around the house ready to rock and roll, I most likely would secure the firearms while I was present to. When things calm down he can come to the office and get them back. I don't see how he was violated. And just how did the officers "force" the guys wife to nod for consent to search? That part seems particularly unbelievable.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 11:30:38 AM EDT
Not being an LEO I have no idea if it was domestic or not, nethier do most LEOs. But I also have a few guns in the house that I know the loacation of, as do the wife and kids. They are loaded and ready to go. My wife does not have a brother, my sister has a husband however, and if I said "leave", Well, he is stupid but not that stupid. My house, and I say get out, man, you get out. I will say that I think the ex LEO held his temper very well, I am not sure I could do that. Ya know guys there are some of us out here that will absoluty not have our homes invaded and are willing to die, and kill to make that clear. I never want to kill another human again, US property, even being stamped on the weapon. But it is my house. And she is my wife, daughter, dog, whatever, don't get between us.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 11:55:54 AM EDT
Originally Posted By tcsd1236: It was a domestic incident,
View Quote
Here's my friend's reply (AR15 isn't accepting new members)
A criminal trespass, in this jurisdiction, has occurred when someone remains on the premise (your property) after you have informed (warned) them to leave. A prima facie case of criminal trespass exists when the property is posted conspicuously, no need for a verbal warning as the sign, naturally, does this in your stead. It is a misdemeanor in this jurisdiction, meaning it is not necessarily an arrest-able offense, unless you are told to leave by a police officer and refuse, you would then be arrested, otherwise all others would be instructed to seek a criminal charging document from a court commissioner... after a police report relating the facts is submitted by the investigating officer. My brother-in-law was required to wait out side, but no trespass report was filed, no instructions given. I was not under arrest and no allegation of any criminal behavior was even suggested by anyone involved. The brother was in violation of criminal trespass, there was no "domestic disturbance" in the legal definition. In fact my wife told the police to leave, the police would not. The firearms in my home at the ready are also know to my wife, for her use. They are there due to my experience as a police officer investigating "home invasions". In the jurisdiction where I worked this was a typical offense, so naturally I am prepared to defend against it. Except for the twelve ga, and even that is hard to detect as it is nestled among several umbrellas, none of the firearms are readily discovered by anyone without knowledge of there where-abouts. The 9 mm was in a draw and only seen once the draw was opened. In the years when I was an active police officer I routinely went into peoples homes and saw firearms laying in plain view on tables and TVs, etc. Not once would I have ever been justified in seizing someone's property from them in those circumstances. No violation of law had occurred upon which any justification of seizure could have been based, period. Your view of the incident I related is sadly the kind of thinking that has given rise to these Nazi tactics. In the jurisdiction that I worked it was a typical call to respond to bars where patrons had been behaving as bad as my brother-in-law, and bouncers throw them out physically onto the side walk, no criminal charges against the bouncers. You seem to suggest that, I, in my own home do not have the absolute right to demand that someone behaving badly should get out. My wife had also asked her brother to wait on the porch, but because I wasn't writing a novel I left out all the minutia. Personally, if you favor that kind of treatment at the hands of the police that's your business, but it's not lawful, not under the U.S. Constitution, even if the police do it over and over again and get away with it.
View Quote
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 12:00:14 PM EDT
May I also add that Maryland has been #1 in home burglary for 5 years running. It's smart practice to keep guns around the house ready to go, despite our Child Protection Law requiring the guns to be secured from children under 16 yo. Neither my buddy nor I have children, so having guns loaded around the house doesn't violate this law.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 12:18:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/1/2001 12:17:51 PM EDT by tcsd1236]
I repeat: It was a domestic incident. The "trespass" of the brother in law is incidental to the dispute between the marital parties., caused by the wifes desire to leave the residence and end the relationship. Yes, you have the right to tell people to "get out" of your home. The officers also have the right to make a determination upon arrival as to the actual events that are causing the problem. In this case, as I said, that problem appears to be the wifes desire to leave the home. I don't know what "domestic incident" is defined as in your area, but in this state is any incident which occurs between married parties or parties with children in common . Our agency also designates disputes between gay/lesbian couples as "domestic incidents", as they cannot legally marry yet have the same sort of disputes that married couples have. In the situation described, I would also have handled it as a domestic incident. If the person who originally called in the trespass complaint still wanted to pursue the trespass issue, I would refer them to the DA's office. Once we are called to the scene of a complaint, we aren't leaving until the investigation is complete. It doesn't matter if you and your wife asked the officers to leave. At that point they have to investigate the incident. Domestic violence laws have changed drastically over the last decade. What once was acceptable, in terms of simply telling the parties to knock it off and then leaving, is no longer possible. I suggest that perhaps your familiarity with the status of domestic violence laws is outdated. Nowadays we have mandated arrest if ANY crime has been commited. The fact that you were not arrested suggests that whatever happened between you and your wife was non-criminal enough that no charges were pressed. Comparing bouncers and domestic incidents is comparing apples and oranges. To get back to your friends original post about the wife removing property, allegedly without his permission: the property was most likely marital property, i.e, held jointly. The wife has as much right to remove it or possess it as he does. Any disputes over ownership or division of the property should properly take place in court during the divvorce proceedings. Until then, she has as much right as he does to anything in that house.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 12:34:41 PM EDT
Remind me to never have a disagreement or heated discussion with my wife on your beat. [rolleyes]
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 12:40:54 PM EDT
tcsd - I think you are wrong.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 12:45:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By tcsd1236: I repeat: It was a domestic incident.
View Quote
Here's his reply: [b]To tcsd1236, You typify the present day mind set of most police officers. You're just following orders. Once a person demands you leave, you leave, get a warrant, if you know how and come back lawfully with the warrant. No part one, felony, or what ever your agency calls them was involved. Furthermore no argument had taken place between me and my wife. No domestic, I don't care what you or anyone else wish to label it to allow you to rationalize you illegal, unconstitutional behavior. You follow orders because you don't want to lose your paycheck, and or the drastically changed domestic violence laws are designed to limit the liability of the jurisdiction and not uphold the constitution. I went to in-service-training where I too was schooled in what was best for the state. I did not violate my fellow countrymen's god given, constitutionally recognized rights. Just because you are apparently an active police officer enforcing these unconstitutional edicts from whatever defense you might offer doesn't change the fact that you have in so much as posting your opinions hear admitted that you will follow orders just like the Nazis. You should expect, one day, to reap what you sow. [/b]
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 12:53:42 PM EDT
Domestic? No. There is no anectdotal evidence of an actual "domestic" or "family" disturbance in the usual, legal sense. The criminal action in this instance is the failure of a party to depart the premises after being told to do so by the lawful owner of same premises (in this case, both legal owners, I presume.) Therefore, the trespass complaint is valid. The domestic disturbance complaint is not. There is no familial disturbance once the trespass complaint is resolved, as the brother-in-law became a non-party to the incident after he was instructed to leave. The fact that he did not is the criminal action here. How can the police "force" his wife to nod? Rmember the "duress" mention (two or three times?) It takes a fairly solid individual to resist a barrage of questions and demads before they acquiesce just to take the strain off their minds. Anyone having been thru Air Force BMT and being called into the "Snake Pit" can identify with such a situation - and will probably pass it with civilian police forces with no trouble... This is exactly the sort of thing that will reduce us to the usefulness of the human vermiform appendix. America is the last true bastion of freedom on the planet - even if it is imperfect and in need of repair. WE must repair it. The cancer is present - shall we excise it or merely allow it to metastize? I vote excision. All in favour? FFZ
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 1:11:10 PM EDT
Well tcsd1236, I won't debate the laws with you, but I think your attitude as a NY cop certainly explains why one of our AR15 brothers ended up with his rights violated and his weapon confiscated when he wasn't apparantly violating any laws.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 1:23:25 PM EDT
I think it was both a trespassing call and a domestic. However, if the wife obviously had a leagal right to be in her residence, then she had a right to have her brother there as well. It sounds like the officers felt that they did'nt have control of the situation and overreacted in an attwempt to gain control. It's hard to second guess when you were not there, but how about this. The officers show up. They ask brother to wait outside. Then tell wife to get some personal things like clothes and toiletries and leave if she desires. Any other property disputes will be taken care of in Chancery Court. If there were weapons present 1 of 2 things would happen during my stay. 1, the male would stay away from them where I could see him or 2, they would be in my possession only until my business was done. If there were no laws broken then it would be pointless and illegal to take the weapons. The only law that appears to be broken was the Battery that occurred. Now that could have influenced the Officers behavior?
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 1:24:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/1/2001 1:23:46 PM EDT by AR15fan]
I wasnt there and dont know what happened. But FWIW it's common interveiw technique to seperate witnesses and not allow them to talk to each other. additionally California law, and I'm sure the laws of several other states, allow police to temporarily seize (72 hours)any firearms at a domestic violence scene.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 1:33:15 PM EDT
another reply by the author:
[b]To tcsd1236,[/b] Apparently you can not conceive of a category to place this matter in other than the narrowly defined one that has been imbedded in you by your instructors. So you revert to your Pavlovian training whereby you are admonished to conform to what you are taught, disregarding the constitution in the process. And you drone "I repeat: It was a domestic incident". Saying it enough makes it so, but only to you and the likes of you. What better motivation, than to have placed in jeopardy your livelihood, how will you pay the mortgage, the car payment, and all the other bills if you don't fall in to the goose-stepping tactics of the modern day Nazis. You are a sad, but shining example of the "I was just following orders" defense. [b]To FreeFireZone,[/b] Well said, thank you.
View Quote
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 1:51:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By FreeFireZone: "Domestic? No. There is no anectdotal evidence of an actual "domestic" or "family" disturbance in the usual, legal sense. " As I've already stated, we have here a dispute between a husband and a wife about her leaving.No, it's not a domestic in the sense of a knock-down drag out, but that is only a per centage of all domestic-type calls. Now, HE claims it was only Q & A. Human nature tells me that some guy who finds out his wife is walking out the door isn't calmly asking questions.Maybe I'm reading into it, but thats how I see it. Case in point was Rews comment that it was his wife, his house, etc, and not to get between them...or words to that effect. Excuse me, your wife is an adult, and doesn't belong to you. If she wants to leave, you cannot stop her, and you can't interfere with us assisting her in doing so. Same applies to the original subject of this thread. " ........The domestic disturbance complaint is not. There is no familial disturbance once the trespass complaint is resolved" This is not true. See above. She's trying to leave the house and get out of the marriage, and evidently was serious enough about it that she stayed away for about 5 months after leaving. "........How can the police "force" his wife to nod? Remember the "duress" mention (two or three times?)..." Thats HIS description.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 2:16:08 PM EDT
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, has the RIGHT to enter my house, that badge in no way make's him/her a god, or even an angle. With a search warrent I will back down, and they can go for it, I will even tie up the dog. I will not be handcuffed, and nither will my wife or chrildren, not with out one hell of a fight anyway. I say again, my house will not be invaded. And I don't care what uniform you where. Just call me a sturben old infantryman, but I fought to make sure this kind of thing does not happen. It won't in MY house. Besides My wife would just shoot my ass, she would never call 911.:)
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 2:19:40 PM EDT
Rew: If we're called to your house on a complaint, we're not leaving until the situations resolved.No warrant needed.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 2:32:32 PM EDT
Tcsd you got the words just right, I am not kidding, and I'll bet ya I would not be the only one the LEOs would have to fight. I understand how hard it is to respond to a domistic, beliave it or not I have, as a PSG not a cop, and I took the Spc 4 back to the barrecks, I stayed there that night and so did he. I take care of my own. But from what I read it seems like a few people where trying to justify their jobs. Well, that is not what I was taught LE was all about. My Wife is mine, if she wants to leave I will be sad and probably even cry but I will never stand in her way. What the "is mine" statment means is I will stand between her and anything that might hurt her. I am sorry you misunderstood, my fault. SFC(ret) Rew E. Williams
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 2:34:46 PM EDT
Be a hell of a fight
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 3:08:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By tcsd1236: As I've already stated, we have here a dispute between a husband and a wife about her leaving.
View Quote
Please do tell us what the "dispute" was. I heard no dispute from the party in question. A question, yes. A dispute, definately no. According to the article above, the police were even called for said trespassing violation. A dispute would consist of some type of disagreement. A dispute would be she said "I'm leaving" and he said "no you are not". I heard nothing about any such exchange and based on the information you have available neither did you. So please tell us what the dispute was. Or better yet, I'll tell you since you are either daft or unwilling to acknowledge any wrong doings by fellow L.E.O.s. The only dispute was between a trespasser and a legally recognized property owner. It sounds to me as though someone guilty of criminal action was set free upon society to make further use of his intimidation tactics and an innocent(read guilty of no crime) citizen had his property illegaly confiscated. So I'll even help you a bit. Here from the Merriam Webster dictionary is the definition of dispute. dis*pute [2] (noun) First appeared 1608 1 a : verbal controversy : DEBATE b : QUARREL 2 obsolete : physical combat The authour indicates no verbal controversy over her leaving, no debate as to IF she is leaving, definately no QUARREL over her leaving and without a doubt no physical combat over her leaving. Would you like to refine your stance on rather or not there was a dispute?
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 4:18:32 PM EDT
I want to thank fight4yourrights for posting for me. I have managed to find my AR15 forums profile name and password, so I'll be making my own post now. Thanks again fight4yourrights, and I'll see you this Saturday... that should confrim that I am who I say I am to Fight4. The retired Po-Lice from Baltimore City. To tcsd1236, Once again, my wife and I were not arguing, (no domestic) we were talking (I was not preventing her from leaving (you seem to be stuck on this as it is the only thing you can argue to support your position), she was free to come and go as she has always been), the brother was interrupting, he was asked to stop by me, and my wife. When he would not, I asked, then told him to wait on the front porch. My wife also told him to go out on the porch. In fact, it was my wife that called the police for the trespass violation. Again I wasn't writing a novel, so I left out much of the minutia for brevity sake. You keep adding that I can't prevent her from leaving, this is your assertion and speaks volumes of you. I did not prevent her from leaving, period. No statement of any wrong doing on my part was offered at all by my wife or my nit-wit of a brother-in-law. In fact my wife told the police to leave. The police would not, also speaks volumes of tactics and training. But just as you have done here in this forum, they read more into the matter than was actually there. The police then became the trespassers, inserting themselves now as an agitator like the brother had been. In their Nazi indoctrinated little minds once they saw the 9 mm in the night stand drawer they all started acting like the mindless little drones they've been conditioned to be, like you are displaying with your reading into it what was not actually there, but what you've been taught to do. My wife kept the apt. for 6 months because that's what she signed the lease for, not because it was as serious as you, again, make it out to be. In fact, she spent the night more often then not in the marital home with me, after diner and movies and our normal routine. One more time for your, apparently, thick indoctrinated little head... my wife and I did not have a dispute, period. And she told the police that were present the same thing. But the goons were not going to have none of that, they, the police, had reduced her to tears in the bedroom by the time she finally nodded in the affirmative to their demands and tactics to search, they also told her that they would tear the place apart with a warrant if she did not permit them to search. But your most recent post illustrates you above the law attitude that you and countless other police posses... Originally Posted By tcsd1236: "Rew: If we're called to your house on a complaint, we're not leaving until the situations resolved.No warrant needed." you are an embarrassment to good police
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 4:39:15 PM EDT
I live in New York and every cop around here is an asshole. In the city near where I live, Schenectady, half the police are being arrested themselves either for drug charges, lieing to put people in jail, or beating up people. They all think because they have a gun and a badge they can walk all over anyone they want. And they picture anyone else with a gun besides them is not just a threat but an enemy.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 5:01:59 PM EDT
"p.s. My wife and I are still together, she came back about 5 months after leaving. One of the main reasons she left... she didn't like the amount of money I was spending on firearms and related equipment." huh? he took her back?????
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 5:12:56 PM EDT
I have learned to never call the police.They only bring trouble and a half hour too late at that.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 5:23:30 PM EDT
[img]http://www.printroom.com/_vti_bin/ViewImage.dll?userid=Savageone&album_id=31115&image_id=46&courtesy=1[/img] "You will respect my authoritah!!!" nuff said Biggame223 Out
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 5:44:50 PM EDT
There is nothing to see here, move along. You gotta love Maryland, whats our state motto again? "Sit down, shutup, and you will learn to love the boot-print"? Kharn
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 6:25:00 PM EDT
"Your leaving? Do you think we should talk about this? Well I guess not. Let me help you and your brother with your bags and possessions. My lawyer will talk with your lawyer. Have a nice life!" "Locksmith in a jiffy? The bitch just left me and I need the locks changed, when can you get over here?" Semper Fi
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 9:42:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By hatebreed:
Originally Posted By tcsd1236: As I've already stated, we have here a dispute between a husband and a wife about her leaving.
View Quote
Please do tell us what the "dispute" was. I heard no dispute from the party in question. A question, yes. A dispute, definately no. According to the article above, the police were even called for said trespassing violation. A dispute would consist of some type of disagreement. A dispute would be she said "I'm leaving" and he said "no you are not". I heard nothing about any such exchange and based on the information you have available neither did you. So please tell us what the dispute was. Or better yet, I'll tell you since you are either daft or unwilling to acknowledge any wrong doings by fellow L.E.O.s. The only dispute was between a trespasser and a legally recognized property owner. It sounds to me as though someone guilty of criminal action was set free upon society to make further use of his intimidation tactics and an innocent(read guilty of no crime) citizen had his property illegaly confiscated. So I'll even help you a bit. Here from the Merriam Webster dictionary is the definition of dispute. dis*pute [2] (noun) First appeared 1608 1 a : verbal controversy : DEBATE b : QUARREL 2 obsolete : physical combat The authour indicates no verbal controversy over her leaving, no debate as to IF she is leaving, definately no QUARREL over her leaving and without a doubt no physical combat over her leaving. Would you like to refine your stance on rather or not there was a dispute?
View Quote
The guy admits that his wife is leaving. He says he was only following her around "asking her questions". As I said, I don't see any guy who just found out his wife is leaving "just asking questions". I suspect that tensions were actually quite high, esp. with the brother-in-laws interjections. It is still a domestic incident.
Link Posted: 11/1/2001 9:48:56 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Try2TakeIt: Originally Posted By tcsd1236: "Rew: If we're called to your house on a complaint, we're not leaving until the situations resolved.No warrant needed." you are an embarrassment to good police
View Quote
You also have to understand that once we are called somewhere and find there is a problem, we simply cannot leave. If we were to leave and take NO action, we would be liable if, in your case, something were to happen to your wife that could have been avoided by taking action. Thats the reality of living in this litigious and liability-driven world. I still think you are white-washing things to fit your side of the story.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 3:57:54 AM EDT
DPeacher: Doesnt everyone own extra cylinders for every lock? [;D] Kharn
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 5:00:59 AM EDT
To tcsd1236, Please, keep posting your comments. I can think of nothing better to display the attitudes of how some police are only interested in CYA rather than upholding and defending the constitution. Did you take an oath to become a police officer? Do you remember the words of that oath, did/do they mean anything to you? Have you ever read the constitution, do you understand it? What if any order/law are you willing to disobey, or will you follow all orders/laws you are told to enforce. As I said please keep posting your comments, the insights you give are invaluable as it will wake many more people up to exactly the kind of some police out there. You really need to be properly educated, you are only properly indoctrinated at this point as evidenced by your comments.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 6:01:26 AM EDT
tcsd1236, Others here seem right on point to me with regards to your authoritarian approach and a$$ covering mindset. Although the wife made the call, and both her and the husband agree that the brother is trespassing and should leave, the officers displayed what in my opinion is nothing more than arrogant contempt for the people involved. It is not all that far from this kind of attitude towards citizens to the kind of thing that has been going on in the Rampart division of the LA police department. What you cannot see is that it is a progression that is becoming more prevalent in many forms of law enforcement. Does this mean all cops are bad or nazis? Not at all. Most, I believe are upstanding citizens and all around good people. However, what bothers people is when officers like yourself cannot see that there are other equally acceptable ways of "resolving the situation" than pushing people around and making threats to prove how much authority you have. In this case, the simple, and fair solution would have been to honor the original complaint and remove the brother, and simply then assist the wife in safely leaving the premises. No searches were needed or called for, no threats to tear up the house, no aggression of any kind was appropriate here, nor was it good policing. I find it terribly amusing that you are so concerned about liability, which, in your mind justifies taking the firearms, while a 12 ga shotgun was in plain sight and no one noticed. Apparently the officers had permission to search (albeit possibly under duress), yet they apparently left the shotgun in the house along with many other firearms. You don't suppose that a case could be made for negligence if something were to happen do you? After all, they got what they wanted, permission to search, and then did a lousy job of it. It would be much easier to defend not searching at all due to a lack of cause to do so, especially if you removed the object of the original complaint, AND made sure the wife involved in the "domestic" you are so worried about leaves safely. Unfortunately, I am certain the day will come when you and your fellow officers are assigned to round up firearms from those with permits and licenses (already happened in your state, BTW). Sadly, I am equally certain that most officers will do so without complaint while "just following orders". Ray
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 6:21:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/2/2001 6:19:10 AM EDT by fight4yourrights]
Originally Posted By tcsd1236: You also have to understand that once we are called somewhere and find there is a problem, we simply cannot leave. If we were to leave and take NO action, we would be liable
View Quote
Well that's just not entirely true. Case after case have proven that the police have NO legal obligation to protect people. Case in point - Washington DC - several women getting raped and beaten in a house. Police repond, but don't want to break the door down. Police leave. Rape continues for hours. Women sue the police, case thrown out of court, court citing that the police have NO obligation to respond. SO don't tell me you would be liable if you left a "domestic" that wasn't.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 6:59:47 AM EDT
Oh, cut it out with the indoctrination b.s. I'm explaining it to you on the basis of agency policy and current laws. And yes, I will perform my job in accordance with those laws.I cannot help it if some of you don't understand how LE works! Every officer who's worth a damn ( and many who aren't, as well) can expect to be sued at some point in their career. Can any of you say the same about your careers? So cut out the "ass-covering" comments. I intend to go home at the end of my shift every night and ensure that I follow agency policy to the letter to ensure that some agrieved complainant doesn't live in my house as the result of a court decision in their favor aginst me. As to the obligation to defend specific individuals: while we are not obligated to defend specific persons(you are right, the Courts have held that to be so), we would certainly be liable if we were sent to a complaint , failed to take action, after which one of the parties came to some harm . I recall the D.C. case. IIRC, the officers arrived, could find no evidence of any crime in progress, and left. Thats one of those types of calls you just hope never to deal with. You'd like to make contact with SOMEONE at the scene to verify if anything is actually going on. The only information the officers had to work with was an unverified phone call. They wouldn't have been able to verify the validity of the compliant without breaking the door down. I certainly wouldn't be breaking the door down at that point based solely on the phone call. As to the shotgun, no one can say if the officers even SAW the shotgun. My guess is, if they had seen it, they would have taken that as well. I've taken weapons from homes in domestics, and will do so again. I know some of you don't particularly like that, but thats a standard procedure in cases of this sort. What some of you don't seem to understand is that there is a set definition of what constitutes a "domestic incident". That is dictated by state law and agency policy. Regardless of the original nature of the complaint, once the officers arrive and determine what the nature of the call actually is, they might have no choice but to reclassify it as a domestic incident.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 7:03:44 AM EDT
.."I've taken weapons from homes in domestics, and will do so again"..
View Quote
BAD COP! NO DOUGHNUT!
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 7:15:20 AM EDT
...I intend to go home at the end of my shift every night and ensure that I follow agency policy to the letter...
View Quote
tcsd1236 keep up those posts. It's good that indoctrinated little Nazis like him post to these forums. His posts confirm for many, willing to see, that there is an us, them attitude on the part of a growing number of current police. A Gestapo-like mentality. If his posts do not reveal his disregard for the very oath and constitution he swore to uphold and defend then I don't know what will. He is arrogant, and stupid, a dangerous combination.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 7:40:48 AM EDT
Watching his posts, he is beginning to crack, overreact, to the "indoctrinated little Nazis" label. A few more will probably have him flaming away. What better demonstration that he is unfit to be a police officer. He can't even maintain a proper public image/decorum on a message board without losing his temper. Imagine having this Nazi pull you over on a dark isolated highway, if you should inadvertenly upset him... well you can imagine how this one will treat you. The insight that this reveals is why he is so willing to attribute actions to others from his own thoughts...
As I said, I don't see any guy who just found out his wife is leaving "just asking questions".
View Quote
No, I guess he can't think beyond his own probable actions, what he actually reveals is his own probable conduct in a similar situation. Very interesting, (in colonel clinks voice). Here he has opened a window into his indoctrinated little Nazis mind, all you have to do now is pay attention to see how demented his view of our rights really is. He only cares about his pay check, not the oath or constitution. Remarkable! Keep up those post you little mindless indoctrinated Nazis... "but I was just following orders"
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 7:42:04 AM EDT
Try2TakeIt, With you being a retired LEO I'm sure that know your brother in law had a legal right to be on your property. Your wife can give that permission. She has as much right to give permission as you do. I'm also sure you're aware that you committed a Battery against your brother in law. I don't think you articulated an immediate threat to your safety justifying physical defense of your person. With that being said I totally agree with the part about your weapons and the search being unconstitutional. There was no reason to perform anything more than a protective sweep, maybe. One more point, you called the police and I believe they have not only a right but a responibility to investigate the call before leaving. Being retired LEO certainly you have went on calls and when you arrived somebody told you to leave that you were'nt needed, right? Did you then leave before finding out why you were there? Come on, that does not wash. By the way, I am from an older generation, not brainwashed and am a huge supporter of all of our rights. I think the situation could have been handled better by all of the parties involved.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 7:54:01 AM EDT
What makes you think I'm cracking? I enjoy these exchanges. I realize that a few people are set in their ways, but you can't get through to everyone. I am more disturbed by you, being an ex-officer, or so you claim. Your posts haven't demonstrated any proof of actually being in LE, and your willingness to throw around statements about JBT's and Nazi's makes me believe that if you WERE one, you were a loose cannon or a do-nothing....just the kind of officer I love to see retire so they sit behind their keyboard bitching about the current generation of officers. Have a nice day.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 8:00:38 AM EDT
TCSD, were you referring to ROD cops, retired on duty? He does seem to have a different perspective on the situation. Of course he was there, that could change your outlook. I've been monitoring this thread for 2 days and it seems to be turning into a name calling contest.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 8:02:12 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 8:09:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By seb127: Try2TakeIt, With you being a retired LEO I'm sure that know your brother in law had a legal right to be on your property. Your wife can give that permission. She has as much right to give permission as you do.
View Quote
To seb127, If you take the time to read my posts you will see that my wife also ask/told her brother to go out on the porch. If you want to continue to ignore that, that's your choice but it demonstrates your inability to follow the thread or your alegence to tcsd1236. As to the rest of your post... when someone standing only a foot from me in my livingroom clenches his fist, and draws it back to deliver a punch... I am not going to wait for him to land it upon me before I react. Pay attention to the posts. The police overstepped there authority and violated my rights when they seized my property, period.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 8:12:42 AM EDT
tcsd1236, Your major flaw is that you are attempting to justify the actions of dumb cops through your generalizations of what you think usually happens on a call. The great thing about police work is the ability to use discresion. If you do not use discresion and modify your actions to the situation, you will not be using your brain. Just because you know of what usually happens on a call doesn't make you qualified to say what really happened didn't. In police culture, the views of angels and assholes tends to overcome rational and just decision making. If you see a wife and a husband, some think DOMESTIC. Well, if a non immidiate family member will not exit the home on the wishes of all residents, it is a trespass. If you cannot enter a situation ready to THINK of what is REALLY happening rather than what is POSSIBLY happening, you will fail. I tend to inherently defend police and their actions, but this is definitely an abusive occurance. If you defend the doing of wrong, you will do wrong.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 8:17:18 AM EDT
Originally Posted By tcsd1236: I am more disturbed by you, being an ex-officer, or so you claim. Your posts haven't demonstrated any proof of actually being in LE, and your willingness to throw around statements about JBT's and Nazi's makes me believe that if you WERE one, you were a loose cannon or a do-nothing....just the kind of officer I love to see retire so they sit behind their keyboard bitching about the current generation of officers. Have a nice day.
View Quote
Well what proof have you demonstrated that you are a Po-lice, and not just some wanna-be, sitting behind their keyboard bitching about someone shinning the light of truth on the current trend in the latest crop of indoctrinated Nazi-like mindless drones that call themselves police officers. Have a nice day your own self...
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 8:18:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By tcsd1236: I am more disturbed by you, being an ex-officer, or so you claim. Have a nice day.
View Quote
I've seen & handled his badge. He's an ex-officer.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 9:16:01 AM EDT
And I am a retired infantryman, but until you walked into my house, you'ed never know it. No firing postions in the front yard and no .50 on the roof. My wife insisted on the "I love me wall" in the den however. She put the CIB on the gun rack herself. I understand people who live in NY see things a bit diffarent than us in Colorado. We have the "Make my day" law and believe it or not it includes no knock raids. A man in a city a little south of here, shot the first officer through the door on a no knock raid he was then shot but survived. He was convicted of drug possion, the muder charge was thrown out. For awhile The local police also had the policy that if they showed up at the door someone was going to jail. Lasted almost 2 month's. Bad policy is bad policy period and it is not law. Seems people would call the police on a person or famliy they did not like for one reason or another. Now, it has never happened to me, so I have no personal expierance, but think about this, Colorado Springs has a lot of military retiree's that have more and better training and combat expierance. A lot of us are sturbin, old NCOs, most if not all are armed. We have very polite police officer's, not because they are scared on the contray, most are the sons and daughters of those retireed, Veterans. Its kind of a mutaul respect, till it come's to the SWAT team, thouse kids could not fight there way out of a wet paper bag.:)
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 11:15:07 AM EDT
Originally Posted By seb127: TCSD, were you referring to ROD cops, retired on duty? He does seem to have a different perspective on the situation. Of course he was there, that could change your outlook. I've been monitoring this thread for 2 days and it seems to be turning into a name calling contest.
View Quote
Yup, that's what I meant. And I agree on the name-calling thing. I'm only trying to explain how and why officers do things that they do, often times based on agency policy or laws, and am being castigated as everything from a Nazi to a drone...not that thats anything new when this type of thread comes up. Given that and the fact I have to concentrate on preparing for an an M2 range I have to run this weekend, this thread serves no further purpose for me. I've said my piece, and people can either accept it or not.
Link Posted: 11/2/2001 11:40:32 AM EDT
Originally Posted By tcsd1236: I'm ...being castigated as everything from a Nazi to a drone... I've said my piece, and people can either accept it or not.
View Quote
If the shoe fits, wear it. I'm only pointing out the mindless Nazi-like drones masquerading as police officers. I've related an incident for the benefit of those interested in reading it. The fact that it flushed out an apologist like you willing to defend the indefensible is nothing new either. Accept that, or not.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top