Category Archives: militarizationofthepolice

“…the two policemen were not at fault”

Read here. Yes, Chief Billy Weeks. Yes, yes, officers Shedran and Day were at a fault. The moment they put on those uniforms and picked up those guns and descended on the Adams’ home to perform a “Drug Raid.”

Police admitted their mistake, saying faulty information from a drug informant contributed to the death of John Adams Wednesday night. They intended to raid the home next door.

Hold on a second here, you lying POS. In one breath, it’s the fault of a drug informant for giving faulty information. In the next, if the reporter is getting it right, you intended to raid the home next door. So which is it? Did you raid the house the informant told you about, which turned out to be incorrect? Or did he give you the correct information, but you got the wrong house? And what’s this with trusting informants without question and without verification? This is how swatting happens and it is entirely the fault of the SWAT team itself if an innocent person gets killed in those situations (but, yes, the person who falsely reported the crime should be prosecuted as well).

Ironwill III is exactly right. I don’t care if he used a bazooka. It was justified. The thugs with guns and badges were the aggressors.

Until the militarization of police departments is reversed and they start actually following the Peelian Principles, they are setting themselves up as enemies of the people.

Put down the select fire rifles, park the Bearcats, and stop treating this as a war zone. Collateral damage due to your mistakes is NOT acceptable. Go read one former cop’s take on that.

I’d rather take my chances with violent drug dealers, gang bangers, and common criminals whom I’ll be exonerated for killing in self defense (and may have a better chance of succeeding due to their lack of SWAT training), rather than killers of the wrong people due to mistakes with state sanction, to boot.

Stay Dangerous, My Friends

Update:Kudos to the widow: “”They need to get rid of those men, boys with toys,” said Adams’ 70-year-old widow, Loraine.”

h/t: Resister in the Rockies via WRSA

Institutional Thuggery

Over at Unc’s, there was this regarding the madness of the town of Keene, NH getting a tank (actually, a Lenco Bearcat).

After one commenter posted something I pretty much agree with, but prefaced it with this:

Look, 99 percent of the cops are good guys, but all this ninja stuff is not needed.

I took issue with it and posted this:

I just can’t agree with the “99 percent of the cops are good guys” statement anymore.

For all of Baron Barnett’s State Sponsored Criminal Count posts, and David Codrea’s Only One’s post, and a host of other sources, it seems there are far too many police chiefs and sheriffs willing to cover for their underlings and partners who don’t speak up.

There are at least three criminals in the Harless case in Canton: Harless, his partner for doing nothing during Harless’ criminal behavior, and the police chief for covering for him (including all his previous incidents) before he was left with no choice but to fire him.

I’m trying real hard not to hate cops in general, but with so many incidents and so much endorsement of it, I don’t think I’ll *ever* trust cops with this kind of equipment.

Another commenter responded, stopping short of actually accusing me of not doing anything to improve the situation. But, it read, in part:

I can understand your frustration and anger in watching something like the Canton incident but that kind of person is a minority in the law enforcement community, believe it or not. What about the Cop in California that buys a kid lunch in Burger King, or someplace like that, then a few minutes later has someone walk up and shoot him in the head? Was he a bad Cop? Did he deserve to get shot in the head just because he was a cop?
It is frustrating when you see a person in that position of trust doing things like that but in this day and age, even with overt evidence like the video, it can be a drawn out process to get rid of a guy like that.

To say it’s frustration and anger is almost condescending. A better word would be motivated. Harless should not have only been fired. He should be in jail. You think not? Would I be if I made those kinds of threats?

It seems qualified immunity has become unqualified immunity in almost all cases. And when that wall is finally, justifiably breached, you have 50 cops saluting the cop guilty of causing Otto Zehm’s death as he’s escorted out by federal marshals.

And then you have the NYPD ticket fixing scandal, where 16 officers were found guilty, yet approximately 100 officers clapped in support of them. Patrick Lynch, the police union president declared, “These officers should not be facing criminal charges for a something that has been a long standing practice at all levels of the department.”

All levels of the department.

Okay, now.

Can you see why it’s so hard to believe they are in the minority as more cases like this surface?

I have zero sympathy for departments who don’t want to risk getting sued over firing criminal cops. Innocent people die as a result. Like Otto Zehm. And then there are the “economic Wacos” where innocent people are harassed and have their substances eaten out when there is no case against them, but they are nevertheless financially ruined, as well as having their reputations destroyed (i.e.: employment prospects become grim).

And don’t even get me started on those who assert that a cop’s life is worth more than a non-cop’s.

Nowhere in my comment on Uncle’s post did I specifically implicate my own local law enforcement, though for all I know, many of them may be guilty, too. I’ll be watching.

As far as “what did I do?” goes, I directly addressed my County Commissioners, along with a representative from the Sheriff’s office (I live outside any town, out in the county) during a working group meeting about an Orwellian named “Good Neighbor” Firearms ordinance and then later at the hearing with the full Board.

I made the statement that, with all due respect to law enforcement, no law should enacted if there is any negative affect whatsoever on individual rights, but yet the only justification is to make the job of law enforcement easier. (I said more, but my previous posts have most of those details.) The point is that I didn’t just attend, but I spoke at these hearings and without sugar coating anything. More than most gun owners would do, or even those in the liberty movement.

But the fix was in and the ordinance passed. But I don’t give up. So your questions are not answered the way you might think. Of course I vote in local elections. And more.

And if you re-read my post you’ll see that I’m not saying they are all clones of Harless. But at least in the case of Seattle and NYC, they are corrupt to the core for supporting the corrupt cops in their midst.