Surrounded by cops today

[Compatriot G]

Except that dispatchers are telephone operators. We pay them to take calls and dispatch the appropriate resource based upon the call. We pay police to investigate proported crimes, expecially those in progress.

The last thing we should want is for a felon to get away because the call is being screened by the dispatcher.

Okay, so a dispatcher gets a call of a robbery in progress. Once they dispatch the location of the call, would it hurt to try and get some more info from the CP? Things that might help the officers as they are in route to the call? Things like a description of what is happening? Description of a suspect, etc.? My cousin is a dispatcher. When it comes to calls concerning violent crimes, I know he tries to get additional information that will give the officers some idea what is going on before they arrive on scene.

 

[dross]

Understood. I appreciate the insight as I HAVE NOT been there, done that. This brings a much clearer picture to my mind, and I see what you are saying.

Look, if you actually read other people's arguments and are willing to modify your own positions based on new information, you're not going to fit in very well with some folks here.

I'd rep you, but apparently I already did pretty recently.

 

[thompal]

Pure, unsupported, conjecture. Your position is that people from the military entering the police department, specifically from the troops to cops program is what has caused changes in the police department from more SWAT teams to not shaking hands?

Back up your assertion.

1. How many cops entered through that program?
2. Are there more cops now with military backgrounds than there were before?
3. Are the cops with military backgrounds the ones exhibiting these particular behaviors?

Ex-soldiers go on to every walk of life, and have for a very long time in this country. My personal experience is that people who are good soldiers tend to be pretty good at whatever they do when they get out.

You seem to think I'm bashing military, or something. I'm not. I was simply pointing out that "police officer" and "soldier" are two totally separate job descriptions, and what are ideal personality traits for one (soldier) are not necessarily acceptable for the other (police officer).

Look at the most basic job of "soldier": They are dropped into an area, and to ensure survival (and victory), they should kill, or be prepared to kill, everyone who is not dressed like them. Their toolkit consists of lethal weaponry, and if a particular job can't be handled by a soldier's M16, he calls someone else who has different tools (air support, armor, etc). It is expected, and acceptable that the soldier may, when confronted by people dressed differently, assume guilt, detain, search, etc. It's for the soldier's safety. (sound familiar?)

I know a lot of soldiers, and for the most part, they are fine, motivated people with good intentions. A couple of them would make good policemen. I know a lot of fine, trustworthy, honest people who have great intentions, but few of them would make good policemen. It takes a certain mental attitude and personality. The simple fact that someone is able to take orders, fire an M16, and maintain physical conditioning does NOT mean that they are automatically good police officer material.

*I* would not be good police officer material. That doesn't mean I'm not a good person, it simply means that I don't have the attitude and patience required to be a good policeman.

 

[MinuteMan47]

Look, if you actually read other people's arguments and are willing to modify your own positions based on new information, you're not going to fit in very well with some folks here.

I'd rep you, but apparently I already did pretty recently.

Don't worry about it. I'm sure you'll get me later...

 

[downzero]

This is why you don't answer the question when asked if armed.

 

[BillD]

This is why you don't answer the question when asked if armed.

So what do you think is going to happen if you don't answer that question?

I'm pretty sure you will be handcuffed and disarmed.

Kinda like what would happen if you did answer the question.

 

[PatriotPride]

May we all have mercy if you are a judge.

Rep'd.

 

[downzero]

So what do you think is going to happen if you don't answer that question?

I'm pretty sure you will be handcuffed and disarmed.

Kinda like what would happen if you did answer the question.

I'm sure it depends on other facts. Either way, there's no reason to volunteer the information.

You can do whatever you like, but I'm not going to volunteer that.

 

[dross]

You seem to think I'm bashing military, or something. I'm not. I was simply pointing out that "police officer" and "soldier" are two totally separate job descriptions, and what are ideal personality traits for one (soldier) are not necessarily acceptable for the other (police officer). .

I don't think you're bashing anyone.

How many soldiers have the "ideal personality traits" for a soldier? Military people come from everywhere and they have lots of different traits.

As to job descriptions, the police have quite a few different ones, and the military have hundreds.

Does a Special Forces soldier have the ideal traits to be a salesman?

Does an Army Ranger have the ideal traits to be a senior project manager?

Does a Delta Force operator have the traits to be a psychologist?

Does a paratrooper have the ideal traits to be an ordained minister?

Does a paratrooper who became a radio announcer and then a commander of an armored unit have the ideal traits to clerk for the Flordia Supremen Court and then become a successful lawyer?

Does a Navy corpsman in the Vietnam era have the ideal traits to run a successful medical company?

Does a cop have the ideal traits to become a soldier?

All of the above are people I know. The point is, if there are ideal traits to be a particular kind of a soldier, very few people have them, and they probably have others that can be used as well.

Also, what you're calling "traits" is more properly called "knowledge and skills" and those can be changed over and over.

Look at the most basic job of "soldier": They are dropped into an area, and to ensure survival (and victory), they should kill, or be prepared to kill, everyone who is not dressed like them. Their toolkit consists of lethal weaponry, and if a particular job can't be handled by a soldier's M16, he calls someone else who has different tools (air support, armor, etc). It is expected, and acceptable that the soldier may, when confronted by people dressed differently, assume guilt, detain, search, etc. It's for the soldier's safety. (sound familiar?)
.

This is a gross oversimplification. All of these are learned behaviors that can be changed.

Special Forces recruits from all MOSs in the Army. They take people who have learned what you describe above, and turn them into the teachers of people who wear a different uniform.

The simple fact that someone is able to take orders, fire an M16, and maintain physical conditioning does NOT mean that they are automatically good police officer material. .

No, it's not automatic. Soldiers are entirely too diverse, however, for the generalizations you've made.

*I* would not be good police officer material. That doesn't mean I'm not a good person, it simply means that I don't have the attitude and patience required to be a good policeman.

I wouldn't be a good police officer, either. Nor would I be a good accountant, or a good public relations person. My not being good at those things has little to do with my military experience.

What I've found is that my military experience is a constant help to ANY endeavor I find myself in, whether related to the job or not.

Going back to how this started, I think you made a blanket statement that can't be supported by evidence, which BTW, you haven't presented. Your original assertion remains unsupported by anything but conjecture.

 

[PatriotPride]

Rally 'round the family...with a pocket full of shells.
Bulls on parade.
**** you I won't do what you tell me.

MMM MMM RATM. I may not agree with all their politics, but sometimes they hit the nail square on the head.

 

[MinuteMan47]

Rally 'round the family...with a pocket full of shells.
Bulls on parade.
**** you I won't do what you tell me.

MMM MMM RATM. I may not agree with all their politics, but sometimes they hit the nail square on the head.

Yep...It's an EVIL EMPIRE

One of the first CDs I ever owned.

 

[jsgolfman]

Awesome! One of my favorite bands. Yeah, we gotta take the power back.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

It's called "[STRIKE]learn[/STRIKE]adapting" and military folks are particularly good at it.

FIFY

 

[dross]

FIFY

I actually meant, "learning." The military is one of the most learning-intense jobs you can have, and learning is in itself as skill.

They're good at adapting, too, though.

 

[Hornett]

I have said it before, but I will repeat it for the newcomers.

I have decided (mostly on reports such as this thread) that I will cooperate fully with an officer until he starts asking about 'weapons'. That is now my red flag to start saying "Am I free to go? I refuse to answer any questions. Am I being detained? Do you have a warrant?"

I really believe (and the OPs interaction with the sergeant verifies this) that asking about weapons starts the cycle of Standard Operating Procedure that leads to confiscated and unloaded handguns.

 

[RichardR]

I've been carrying for 20+ yeas so I've had contact with LEO's on various occasions over the years, needless to say I was much happier with the conduct of the officers who treated me like a law-abiding armed civilian rather than an armed & dangerous criminal.

Thankfully I've only been disarmed at gunpoint once & yes that deputy took it upon himself to completely unload all of my magazines before handing my weapon back to me, I did ask (after it was confirmed that I was not a criminal) why he (over) reacted like he did & his reply was "for his safety" which I sort of scoffed at, since he'd already determined that I was not a dangerous criminal when he took the time to strip all of the cartridges out of all of my magazines.

 

[dross]

I've been carrying for 20+ yeas so I've had contact with LEO's on various occasions over the years, needless to say I was much happier with the conduct of the officers who treated me like a law-abiding armed civilian rather than an armed & dangerous criminal.

Thankfully I've only been disarmed at gunpoint once & yes that deputy took it upon himself to completely unload all of my magazines before handing my weapon back to me, I did ask (after it was confirmed that I was not a criminal) why he (over) reacted like he did & his reply was "for his safety" which I sort of scoffed at, since he'd already determined that I was not a dangerous criminal when he took the time to strip all of the cartridges out of all of my magazines.

Did he pat you down to see if he had all your magazines, or just the ones you were polite enough to tell him about?

 

[ihateiraq]

Look, if you actually read other people's arguments and are willing to modify your own positions based on new information, you're not going to fit in very well with some folks here.

I'd rep you, but apparently I already did pretty recently.

ditto.

Look at the most basic job of "soldier": They are dropped into an area, and to ensure survival (and victory), they should kill, or be prepared to kill, everyone who is not dressed like them. Their toolkit consists of lethal weaponry, and if a particular job can't be handled by a soldier's M16, he calls someone else who has different tools (air support, armor, etc). It is expected, and acceptable that the soldier may, when confronted by people dressed differently, assume guilt, detain, search, etc. It's for the soldier's safety. (sound familiar?)

no one in the army does this anymore. it has become the stance of the army that the best way to defeat the insurgency is by befriending the indigenous population. an element will take their interpreters out into a village or city and wander around building rapport with the locals. you dont point weapons at non-hostiles. you dont destroy a village to kill a sniper. arty is never used on populated areas, most of our armor is out of the country, and air support is used very sparingly. we carry a plethora of less lethal devices, from lasers to paintball guns. sure delivering mayhem to those that need it brought to them is still an option, but its the last one. counterinsurgency is very similar to police work.

 

[deerslayer13]

i must say that would def anger me . i carry open and and once have i been asked to show my LTCH and actully he didnt asked but told me to go back in my home before i waz arrested, of course i said no tossed him my wallet and waited to get it back. Just that made me upset . Can only guess you where a little more ticked off than me

 

[RichardR]

Did he pat you down to see if he had all your magazines, or just the ones you were polite enough to tell him about?

Yea he patted me down, (after holding me at gun point while he removed my pistol from it's holster) then after patting me down he took everything out of my pockets & even turned my pockets inside out.

I wasn't very happy with the way I was treated, especially since I had done nothing wrong, a woman simply saw my weapon which had become partially uncovered & called the police to report "a man with a gun".