Surrounded by cops today

[thompal]

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.

Which statement is that?

That the DoJ/DoD Troops to Cops program existed in the 90's? I can find some references if you really doubt it.

That trends have gone away from "Officer Friendly" and more toward a militarization of police since the 90's? I can't possibly be the only one to notice this.

That what makes a good soldier doesn't necessarily make a good police officer? This, we can debate.

 

[Eddie]

Which statement is that?

That the DoJ/DoD Troops to Cops program existed in the 90's? I can find some references if you really doubt it.

That trends have gone away from "Officer Friendly" and more toward a militarization of police since the 90's? I can't possibly be the only one to notice this.

That what makes a good soldier doesn't necessarily make a good police officer? This, we can debate.

From what I can find, it doesn't seem like there were enough troops to cops hires to account for much of an effect on the makeup of PDs.

COPS Office: Troops

 

[thompal]

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.

Well, I may have actually overstated the influence of the Troops to Cops program specifically. According to:

COPS Office: Troops

there were only about 1000 troops placed using this program nationwide, and I can't find a list of cities where they ended up. I seem to remember Clinton and Reno stating it would be much larger than that. Either I mis-remembered, or they lied. Either is about as likely, I'd say.

 

[serpicostraight]

im a vet myself so i know alot of people can make the transition with no problem. but there is always the exception like that little punk daniel martin that makes everybody look bad.

 

[PatriotPride]

Yep...It's an EVIL EMPIRE

One of the first CDs I ever owned.

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

Definitely one of my favorite bands. I do NOT agree with their stance on the Arizona Immigration Law, but generally when they speak of our government and our police, they are right on the money.

 

[Roadie]

personaly its my experience as told by my buddies who tried to or were successful in getting a LE career, that a lot of police departments dont give former military a fair shake. but neither does the private sector, so whats new.

why not? people come out of the military in shape, proficient with firearms, able to think on their toes, and have the ability to follow orders/instructions.

My son-in-law was told by an IMPD recruiter that being a Master at Arms in the Navy wouldn't help him at all, but having any college courses would..

 

[Joe Williams]

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.

But then, you get to make them explain in court the RAS and PC for the arrest, and make them explain why they chose to violate your rights and arrest you for exercising yours. Because, no matter how much the sheep in here might like to think so, there is nothing about reparing a light that gives reason to believe the person is committing a felony.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

But then, you get to make them explain in court the RAS and PC for the arrest, and make them explain why they chose to violate your rights and arrest you for exercising yours. Because, no matter how much the sheep in here might like to think so, there is nothing about reparing a light that gives reason to believe the person is committing a felony.

No, there's nothing about repairing a light that gives rise to probable cause. The probable cause came when someone called 911 reporting a burglery in progress. The probable cause continued when the officer arrived and found someone on a ladder in a position described by the caller. It diminished when the officer discussed the situation with the suspect, and was extinguished when it was established that the person on the ladder was simply working on the building and that in fact no crime had been committed. Everything about the possession of an LTCH and a gun is irrelevent except to the extent that the suspect would have been under arrest until the facts of the situation established and resolved.

The OP handled everything correctly. He was under investigation for a reported felony. He cooperated. He identified himself. He handed over his weapon. He sat quietly and calmly while the officers investigated. Had he failed to provide identification he could have been charged with a Class C Misdemeanor for failing to ID. Had he gotten load and beligerent he coupld have been charged with Disorderly Conduct. If he had told them he was armed and wasn't giving up his gun after refusing to identify himself he could have been sprayed, tazed or shot. And for what end? To say that he was not giving up his rights? To what? Keep a loaded gun while being investigated for the commission of a felony? No such right exists.

This situation had nothing to do with a friggin gun! It was a police call that was responded to and resolved. I don't get what is so hard to understand about that?

 

[Joe Williams]

snip
This situation had nothing to do with a friggin gun! It was a police call that was responded to and resolved. I don't get what is so hard to understand about that?

It had nothing to do with a gun until the police, lacking any ACTUAL evidence (a phone call does not constitute probable cause) of a crime in progress, chose to continue to detain the citizen and and investigate the gun even after being presented with a LTCH, in violation of the law as affirmed by the state Supreme Court.

 

[MinuteMan47]

No, there's nothing about repairing a light that gives rise to probable cause. The probable cause came when someone called 911 reporting a burglery in progress. The probable cause continued when the officer arrived and found someone on a ladder in a position described by the caller. It diminished when the officer discussed the situation with the suspect, and was extinguished when it was established that the person on the ladder was simply working on the building and that in fact no crime had been committed. Everything about the possession of an LTCH and a gun is irrelevent except to the extent that the suspect would have been under arrest until the facts of the situation established and resolved.

The OP handled everything correctly. He was under investigation for a reported felony. He cooperated. He identified himself. He handed over his weapon. He sat quietly and calmly while the officers investigated. Had he failed to provide identification he could have been charged with a Class C Misdemeanor for failing to ID. Had he gotten load and beligerent he coupld have been charged with Disorderly Conduct. If he had told them he was armed and wasn't giving up his gun after refusing to identify himself he could have been sprayed, tazed or shot. And for what end? To say that he was not giving up his rights? To what? Keep a loaded gun while being investigated for the commission of a felony? No such right exists.

This situation had nothing to do with a friggin gun! It was a police call that was responded to and resolved. I don't get what is so hard to understand about that?

If the situation had "nothing to do with a friggin gun" then why was it important for the LEO to disarm the OP and check to see if the GUN was stolen?

 

[MinuteMan47]

...BTW, people were talking about "false informing" earlier in the thread. IMO the woman who made the 911 call should be warned and if she chooses to make another STUPID 911 CALL again then SHE SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH "FALSE INFORMING"!!!

 

[downzero]

No, there's nothing about repairing a light that gives rise to probable cause. The probable cause came when someone called 911 reporting a burglery in progress. The probable cause continued when the officer arrived and found someone on a ladder in a position described by the caller. It diminished when the officer discussed the situation with the suspect, and was extinguished when it was established that the person on the ladder was simply working on the building and that in fact no crime had been committed. Everything about the possession of an LTCH and a gun is irrelevent except to the extent that the suspect would have been under arrest until the facts of the situation established and resolved.

The OP handled everything correctly. He was under investigation for a reported felony. He cooperated. He identified himself. He handed over his weapon. He sat quietly and calmly while the officers investigated. Had he failed to provide identification he could have been charged with a Class C Misdemeanor for failing to ID. Had he gotten load and beligerent he coupld have been charged with Disorderly Conduct. If he had told them he was armed and wasn't giving up his gun after refusing to identify himself he could have been sprayed, tazed or shot. And for what end? To say that he was not giving up his rights? To what? Keep a loaded gun while being investigated for the commission of a felony? No such right exists.

This situation had nothing to do with a friggin gun! It was a police call that was responded to and resolved. I don't get what is so hard to understand about that?

Is it possible to be arrested for disorderly conduct in Indiana if the only person you're disorderly towards is a police officer? If so, Indiana definitely needs to change that law.

I wouldn't have told the cop I was armed at all. He was under no obligation to do so. If the cop used force against him, he would have had a hard time explaining that later, regardless of the claims on the phone.

 

[dross]

Which statement is that?

That the DoJ/DoD Troops to Cops program existed in the 90's? I can find some references if you really doubt it.

That trends have gone away from "Officer Friendly" and more toward a militarization of police since the 90's? I can't possibly be the only one to notice this.

That what makes a good soldier doesn't necessarily make a good police officer? This, we can debate.

You claimed that the attitude of the police, as in not shaking hands, and the increase in military type units and military tactics were a direct result of more ex military joining the police. You also claimed that more ex military joined the police due to the troops to cops program.

Okay, I'll let you off the hook on whether the troops to cops program caused more ex military to join the police.

No one has argued that being a good soldier NECESSARILY means the guy will be a good police officer. Your statement strongly implies that being a soldier NECESSARILY means they won't be a good cop.

I dispute two of your premeses and your conclusion. BTW, you've changed your conclusion from ex-military don't make good cops to they don't automatically make good cops. Nice.

The premeses I dispute and for which you've provided no evidence, only conjecture:

1. Due to some reason (since you've backed off from troops to cops) there are more cops who are ex-military than there used to be at some undetermined time in the past.
2. Because their are more cops who are ex-military, cops have gone away from being friendly, AND they use more military gear and tactics.

The argument I brought up to you was never whether soldiers make good cops or not. It was your unsupported assertions. I have, however, in several other posts addressed the idea that being ex-military is in of itself some sort of negative to being a cop.

 

[MinuteMan47]

. Everything about the possession of an LTCH and a gun is irrelevent except to the extent that the suspect would have been under arrest until the facts of the situation established and resolved.

Oh yeah, I think you meant to say DETAINED (until the LTCH was provided). We already came to the conclusion that the store was not being robbed.

 

[RichardR]

No one has argued that being a good soldier NECESSARILY means the guy will be a good police officer. Your statement strongly implies that being a soldier NECESSARILY means they won't be a good cop.

For what ever it is worth, the "over-reacting" deputy in my story was a former soldier, he noticed my dog tags while searching me & mentioned that he had also served.

He still unloaded all of my magazines though.

 

[Rookie]

No, there's nothing about repairing a light that gives rise to probable cause. The probable cause came when someone called 911 reporting a burglery in progress. The probable cause continued when the officer arrived and found someone on a ladder in a position described by the caller. It diminished when the officer discussed the situation with the suspect, and was extinguished when it was established that the person on the ladder was simply working on the building and that in fact no crime had been committed. Everything about the possession of an LTCH and a gun is irrelevent except to the extent that the suspect would have been under arrest until the facts of the situation established and resolved.

The OP handled everything correctly. He was under investigation for a reported felony. He cooperated. He identified himself. He handed over his weapon. He sat quietly and calmly while the officers investigated. Had he failed to provide identification he could have been charged with a Class C Misdemeanor for failing to ID. Had he gotten load and beligerent he coupld have been charged with Disorderly Conduct. If he had told them he was armed and wasn't giving up his gun after refusing to identify himself he could have been sprayed, tazed or shot. And for what end? To say that he was not giving up his rights? To what? Keep a loaded gun while being investigated for the commission of a felony? No such right exists.

This situation had nothing to do with a friggin gun! It was a police call that was responded to and resolved. I don't get what is so hard to understand about that?

Greeno v. State

Op was doing nothing that suggested he was committing a crime. A terry stop doesn't apply because installing/repairing/replacing a light cannot be remotely considered as committing a crime.

Greeno was doing nothing to suggest potential criminal activity. He was sitting on a roll of carpet in a parking lot, while Terry and his companion had been "casing" a store for a robbery. Accordingly, we decline the State’s invitation to find this search reasonable by way of analogy to [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Terry[/FONT][/FONT].

Phone call did not describe anyone, just stated that she thought they were being robbed.

For an anonymous tip to give rise to reasonable suspicion, the tip must contain facts not "easily obtainable by the general public" such that the police may verify the tip’s credibility and it must "demonstrate an intimate familiarity with the suspect’s affairs and be able to predict future behavior."


The fact that the operator's first encounter with the police officer was with the officer's gun pointed at him, any reasonable person would believe he was being detained. Considering the police had no reason to detain him, his rights were violated.

 

[dross]

I was just relating a personal experience that directly related to the conversation at hand.

My comment sounded more terse than I meant it. My apologies. I'm just campaigning against anecdotal evidence.

 

[E5RANGER375]

My son-in-law was told by an IMPD recruiter that being a Master at Arms in the Navy wouldn't help him at all, but having any college courses would..

yep, and sadly I have a college degree and it was overlooked by many civilian employers because they wanted on the job experience i asked how was I supposed to have experience when I've been overseas fighting in the Army . they didnt care what my rank was, or what awards I earned. they were comparing me to every other dumb ass who had ever walked into their office. I could have ran circles around their leadership staff. I took a entry level possition instead of management (i wasnt offered management) and within 2 months I developed an inventory system that saved the company 2.3 million dollars every year. Its was common sense realy, but all those "guys with experience" twice my age never figured it out like I could with a set of fresh eyes. then they were begging me to take a management possition, but I was offered a job somewhere else making a lot more $$ and being respected for what skills I had and dedication I brought to the table. Talk about feeling spit at by your own countrymen. Thats ok, i would do it all again in a heart beat, even if it were the same results and I knew it. My military experience has helped me through every aspect of my life since then. I might not be the best people skills person, but I will be respectful. I ended up sticking in the same line of work as the military basicly only I work for a private company technicaly. Its the ultimate dream job, besides one day opening my own gun shop. (stay tuned southside )

 

[RichardR]

My comment sounded more terse than I meant it. My apologies. I'm just campaigning against anecdotal evidence.

Thanks I appreciate the apology & the clarification.

 

[dross]

yep, and sadly I have a college degree and it was overlooked by many civilian employers because they wanted on the job experience i asked how was I supposed to have experience when I've been overseas fighting in the Army . they didnt care what my rank was, or what awards I earned. they were comparing me to every other dumb ass who had ever walked into their office. I could have ran circles around their leadership staff. I took a floor production possition instead of management (i wasnt offered management) and within 2 months I developed an inventory program that saved the company 2.3 million dollars every year. then they were begging me to take a management possition, but I was offered a job somewhere else making a lot more $$ and being respected for what skills I had and dedication I brought to the table. Talk about feeling spit at by your own countrymen. Thats ok, i would do it all again in a heart beat, even if it were the same results and I knew it.

Common problem for ex military. It has less to do with a lack of respect than it does a basic lack of understanding of what you do in the military. I was a headhunter for several years. I've rewritten literally thousands of resumes. PM me and I'll look at yours and give you a hand translating it into civilianese.