Ridiculous Police News (Specific events)

[Melena]

Obama's been a mixed bag of good and bad, but this is a really good step. The militarization of our civil police force is and has been a serious problem for quite some time now. Next step is in backing the training away from military tactics. Needs moar deescalation.

The only ones that are close to military tactics is your SWAT/SRU teams, and while the situations are rare, they do need to be trained to deal with hostage rescue, active shooter, etc.

[Xantavia]

Wow what the fuck do departments need 50 cals for lol? That's the type of shit I used to use as a crew-served weapon in Iraq for convoys.

Think it is part of the war on terror. Departments are given a ton of money, and if they don't spend it, they have it cut next year. So they buy military surplus to use up the funds.

[Melena]

I may be wrong, but a lot of the military surplus, especially vehicles are being sold for pennies, so long as the agency pays to transport them.

[6souls]

A lot of it was acquired because they could get it. MPR (MN Public Radio) had mentioned in an article yesterday that a small town in MN acquired night vision goggles and a sniper scope for their 3 officers. There is a college town that received a mine-proof transport vehicle. And another town had loaded up on assault rifles because of the scare in the 1990's that criminals were better equipped than the cops.

[Ghost_Wheel22]

Obama's been a mixed bag of good and bad, but this is a really good step. The militarization of our civil police force is and has been a serious problem for quite some time now. Next step is in backing the training away from military tactics. Needs moar deescalation.

So what would be the replacement training paradigm? Using existing ICS with a focus on minimizing scary black colored things like MRAPs, bump helmets, Level IV PCs, issued M-16s, and Oakleys? Bear in mind it would need to be a universal cross-agency model that is flexible based on budget, personnel, and level of training.

[FNH]

and a sniper scope

Why does it need such a distinction other than sensationalism? I don't think a police department buying a Schmidt & Bender, Swarovski, Nightforce, or U.S. Optics scope is a big deal.

[Niiro]

Well were talking about a small town with 3 officers.

What are the odds one of them has sniper training <_>

[archibaldcrane]

Why does it need such a distinction other than sensationalism?

I bet they have a lot of semi-automatic handguns too!

[6souls]

Here's a little info on the town with 3 officers;

Royalton, MN - Pop 1.2k+ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royalton,_Minnesota
Police department's webpage - http://www.royaltonmn.com/index.asp?...D8E6DDD8605%7D

Turns out that the reason they were put in the article I read was because they were one of the cities returning a Grenade Launcher

http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2...ncher_1033.php

Royalton doesn't need a grenade launcher, but the town's chief of police defends the right of law enforcement agencies to possess military hand-me-downs. "When you're dealing with criminals you're dealing with a whole other element," he says. "You don't know what they're capable of -- whether they have weapons or homemade explosives or whatever."

Also, I know this means little, but the police chief builds drones in his spare time;

http://diydrones.com/profile/AdamGunderson

[FNH]

I bet they have a lot of semi-automatic handguns too!

http://cdn.head-fi.org/d/d8/350x321p...c83cd0179f.png

[6souls]

Remember that officer in Cleveland who stood on top of a car after a chase and emptied 49 rounds into the passengers? He was acquitted of any wrong doing. Judge said that he couldn't find anything wrong with his actions because the situation called for it.
71 people were arrested last night during the protest.

[Salodin]

You're missing a bit of relevant info. He is one of 13 officers that fired 137 total rounds at the car that was involved in a high speed chase. The officer was acquitted because there was nothing legally wrong with what he did, but the entire thing is still going through a federal investigation, and there are supervisors facing [misdemeanor] charges from the handling of the case. There's still a good chance something resembling justice comes from this case.

[6souls]

Besides the fact he jumped on the hood to unload after everyone else stopped firing.

[Salodin]

We talking morally wrong or legally?

[Blubbartron]

We talking morally wrong or legally?

The fact that we have to make a distinction should be much, much more distressing.

[Salodin]

I don't believe so. Some people find it morally wrong to have an abortion, but thankfully it's not legally wrong. That example alone should illustrate why we make the distinction between morally wrong and legally wrong.

To add, the reason the cop wasn't charged is because even if you subtract his bullets from the scenario you still have 90+ bullets hitting the suspects and the car; they were dead any ways and there is no way to prove beyond reasonable doubt that that particular cops actions was the factor involved in their death. I'm ok with this, because the departments procedures are to blame, not one cop, and that part of the investigation is still under way.

[6souls]

This is what rustles my jimmies

During the trial, prosecutors argued that Officer Brelo’s actions crossed the line from justifiable to reckless when he climbed onto the car’s hood, but the judge disagreed.

Before rendering his verdict, Judge O’Donnell spoke from the bench about widespread tensions between the police and African-Americans, mentioning Ferguson and Baltimore.

“In many American places, people are angry with, mistrustful and fearful of, the police,” he said. “Citizens think the men and women sworn to protect and serve have violated that oath or never meant it in the first place.”

But Judge O’Donnell said he would not let those sentiments cloud his verdict, and he found that Officer Brelo had reasonably perceived a threat from Mr. Russell’s car. The decision to continue firing from the hood was protected by law, he ruled, clearing Officer Brelo of all charges. The shooting was “reasonable despite knowing now that there was no gun in the car and he was mistaken about the gunshots,” Judge O’Donnell said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/24/us...12-deaths.html

I understand him not being charged with the death of the couple, but to be found not guilty of being reckless during the incident.

I've seen some blogger articles pointing at him being an Iraq War vet as the reason for his actions, but at the same time, I've seen countless more Veteran comments of not wanting to being to be categorized with this guy.

[archibaldcrane]

The argument that they were already dead before he got on the hood, and the argument that they were still a threat and that's why he kept blasting, are in completely obvious contradiction.

[Salodin]

That's not the argument archi. The argument is that they can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that his actions caused their death, so therefore he can't be charged as responsible for manslaughter. That makes perfect sense, imo.

Is the dude overzealous in how he approached the situation? More then likely, but you gotta remember they had reports of gun fire from the vehicle as well as a nice 100mph chase. The facts after the case are irrelevant, as the judge pointed out. All of that is why the shooting was justified, even though better training might prevent a 137 bullet catastrophe from happening again.

I'm more curious in the federal investigation, including the 5 misdemeanor charges bought against some supervisors. What did they do that wasn't kosher?

[Salodin]

All of that said, can you be charged with reckless anything if you did nothing legally wrong? I'd imagine that's why he's walking scott free, as unfortunate as it probably will be in the future if he gets into a tense situation again.