Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America

OK, OF COURSE there are occasions when innocent people are shot/injured. It's part of the cost of having undereducated, inexperienced young cops on the street. The fact is cops come from the human race and therefore, are subject to human frailties.

The fact is, if these incidents were not rare, they wouldn't be newsworthy. The statistics are that society is safer because of the presence of cops than it would would be without them. Dogs bite people every day: Not news. Man bites dog: News. Get it???

Many of us wouldn't be so bitter if we didn't see the "little people" being prosecuted for things that the "elite" get away with.

I recently read a professional police message board, and the contempt shown for the average citizen was disgusting. And the
unspoken rule that no erring cop EVER is to be held accountable by other cops is absolutely horrifying.

I can't say what you say isn't true sometimes. Have you ever told an off-color or crude joke. Cop humor, venting, disdain for citizens is something we, who are professionals work against. BTW many "professional" police aren't PROFESSIONAL. Law enforcement officer are largely drawn from the lower middle class, they are frequently under-educated and sometimes not well trained. Have you personally had a bad experience, or are you relying on the word of others and on emotional need for life in a perfect place? There's no place like perfect.

That being said, I spent the vast majority of my career teaching and enforcing the service ethic to my subordinates. Perfect? Nope.

In another thread, I encouraged freepers to DEMAND professional service from their police departments. I would submit to you that you should do the same.

Statistically,a fraction of one percent of police contacts turn out negatively. I spent 21 years working for a large metropolitan police department. During that time, the department was frequently criticized for brutality, racism, etc. I worked in a black part of town, with gangs and other real bad guys. I never tolerated racism, rudeness, or any other kind of bad behavior. Are there bad cops? YES. Are there substandard law enforcement agencies at all levels? Yes. But not all cops are bad and not all agencies are bad. If you want bad, go to Mexico, Pakistan, Iran. You'll see bad.

When I was teaching democratic policing in the former Yugoslavia after the Bosnian War, I had a WOMAN police officer tell me that if a woman walks down a dark alley and gets raped, it's her fault. I call that bad. In Pakistan,when they want a person to confess, they put him in a room with a cobra and wait for him to confess. That's bad. Here, we could improve. But considering how bad it could be, it's not all bad.

My daughter chose a career in law enforcement. She's college educated, intelligent, dedicated to her profession. She is highly ethical and dedicated to public service. She's not bad. I urge you to engage, to talk to your elected officials if you have concerns, ask for a ride-along and see it through the eyes of the cops. To sit on the sidelines and chip at law enforcement is easy you may even find it emotionally satisfying. To engage is much harder and can be emotionally draining. Your choice.

"Engage, demand transparency through your elected officials, not only when there is a crisis, but all the time."

Absolutely.

"Oh, one other thing. If there is 'regular' pergery [sic] going on, it's going on in front of a judge, prosecutor, and possibly a jury. What are you doing about that?"

1) Juries can't do anything about perjury. They can't charge anyone.
2) Prosecutors DON'T do anything about police perjury, even after complaints about it. Their CSC and other 'real' felony cases rely upon dirty cops coming across as clean officers. They are disincentived to prosecute cops.
3) Judges can't sua sponte charge someone with perjury. They can't charge anyone, either.

So you tell me, what should be done about such a situation?

The worst thing I've seen about it is that the police I've seen obviously lying about their recollection would have the benefit of the doubt from the judge or jury anyway. If these cops would simply admit they don't remember all the details, or screwed up somehow, and simply tell the truth to the best of their recollection instead of the best of their fabrication, they'd make the system look good at the same time they're convicting the crooks.

(1) I'd like to know (In a general sense) where all this is going on. I’ve never worked in an area I would consider “corrupt”. To me, from your comments, it sounds like systemic corruption.

(2) Virtually every prosecutor's office, police department, etc, has an office of professional responsibility, Internal Affairs or the like.

(3) Then there is the media. Reporters are dying for stories documenting police corruption.

(4) "Juries can't do anything about perjury." They can ACQUIT the defendant(s)!

(5) If you've ever been in chambers with a judge, might be surprised about how much the judge can get done.

(6) “The worst thing I've seen about it is that the police I've seen obviously lying about their recollection would have the benefit of the doubt from the judge or jury anyway.”
If you’re not a judge, defense attorney, court reporter, prosecuting attorney, bailiff, habitual offender, etc, why are you spending so much time in the court room that you’ve seen so many cases of perjury? (sp?).

(7) As to the “unspoken” rule about “no erring cop EVER is to be held accountable by other cops is absolutely horrifying.”
The “Blue Code of Silence” does exist in some organizations. It is because the people in these organizations have the same dilemma everyone else does: Where do you draw the line? We ask this question every day. The classic question goes something like this; If you and your partner are dispatched to a burglar alarm and find the window of an ice cream store smashed. You go in to find the phone number of the proprietor. Your partner sticks his finger into an open container of ice cream and puts the ice cream in his mouth. What are you going to do?

The classic response is a “deer in the headlights” look from the person asked a hard swallow followed by a pause and a stumbling answer, attempting to talk his way out of the dilemma. On the one hand, "this is the same partner who covers my back in tight situations, the same partner who has a family he/she has to support, who knows some of my inner thoughts and secrets". On the other hand, "it makes me/us look bad. It’s stealing, it messes up the rest of the ice cream".

The answer is framed as follows: We all stand on top of a hill. The top of the hill is safe, but the sides are very steep. It’s raining and the slope is muddy. Do you want to step off the top and go down the “slippery slope”? When framed like this, the answer is usually “No, but…” To which the response is “NO BUTS”. You either uphold the ethical standards or you are unethical yourself.

In the LAPD, there is a charge called “Acquiescing” that means if you saw or aware of something wrong and did nothing, you are guilty also. In other words, you can’t look the other way.

What should be done about such a perjury, lying, corruption?

Like I said: Engage, fight back., If one approach doesn’t work, try another. We, the citizens are (or are supposed to be) in charge. A letter to the editor, a letter to the chief of police, a complaint to the office of professional responsibility, to the Attorney General, to the bar association, show up in court and monitor and then write down what you see. Expose corruption to the light of day.

One of the most serious problems faced by the law enforcement community is supervision. Being promoted to sergeant does not make one a leader. Leadership must be learned and practiced. All too often, this axiom is forgotten, or never even known to begin with. If there is weak leadership in an organization, there are going to be problems. Last night, where my wife works, (federal level) they dropped the ball. Let some bad guys get away with something. When she came home and told me about it, I was appalled. There problem is they are a bunch of mostly competent people, but they lack leadership, so no-one is in charge to break the ties, make decisions on behalf of the group. LACK OF LEADERSHIP!

I could write a book about it, but I’m too old and worn out.

If our Founding Fathers had the b@lls to take on the British Crown, can’t we do a little to save ourselves?

“I would rather face an army of lions led by a lamb than an army of lambs led by a lion.” Winston Churchill.

I'd like to see a map of NOT botched raids, etc. Which map do you think would truly blanket the map?

Look, we know, and we all should care about "botched" raids. For those involved, they are undoubtedly horrible. That doesn't mean throwing out the baby with the bath water though. Balance is the key. In the LAPD there are (at least when I retired) 60 SWAT cops. That's out of an organization of about 7900. What' the percentage of SWAT to "regular" cops (.008%) They are the "gold standard". SWAT lookalikes do exist. They need to be reigned in, but there is, by no means, an epidemic of ninja killings of innocents. That's just a little hyperbolic.

Define cops: More properly, police officers, deputy sheriffs, state traffic officers, state patrols, etc, at commissioned or sworn at the no higher than the state level.

Not cops: Border Patrol, FBI special agents, ATF agents, National Park Rangers, sundry federal protective service agents, Secret Service agents, door shakers, renta-cops, etc.

The difference: Powers to make arrests without warrants based upon probable cause.

The feds have to get a warrant to arrest a citizen unless they act as private persons with the same limitations upon them. Why: They're NOT COPS

EXCEPTION: On federal property, ie, National Parks, Indian reservations, federal property such as the White House, federal buildings, military reservations, etc. If you were to base your understanding on TV you might get another impression because they are protrayed as having Probable Cause arrest powers.

Granted, a lot of the hostility is based on unpopular laws the police must enforce, such as speed traps and seat belt laws, and the increased power law enforcement agencies have been granted by the legislatures, the courts, and Congress, such as warrantless searches and confiscation of property without due process. People should focus on those who pass the laws: legislators and judges.

The federal government creates about 3,000 new laws and regulations each year. State governments each create about a quarter that many. Politicians and bureaucrats, aided by a facilitating media and special interest groups, assert that every new law and regulation is necessary to save people and society from certain doom. Almost every person breaks the law several times each year.

Who has real power?

Despite 3,000 new laws and regulations added each year people increasingly prosper despite rampant lawlessness.

How is it that persons and society haven't self-destructed with such huge lawlessness? Actually, it's direct evidence/proof that typical Americans' (productive workers, entrepreneurs and citizens in general) self-interest is more powerful than politicians and bureaucrats (parasitical elites) self-interest. Value creators' methods are effective and cause them and society to prosper despite breaking the law. Parasitical elites usurp prosperity despite their laws being ineffective. The vast majority of new laws are not valid laws, unnecessary and a drain on the value creators the economy and society. Proclamations written by self-proclaimed authorities under the color of law used to control the citizens as various collective.

In reality it's the individual value producer, the highest authority, acting in his and her own self-interest that is benefiting/saving persons and society from the possibility of doom.

Arrogant and high handed LEOs, unfair laws, and increased government intrusiveness may lead to an anti-police backlash that will weaken law enforcement effectiveness.

LEOs grant their colleagues special privileges they don't give to citizens. Many LEOs do illegal drugs and/or drive while intoxicated. Many LEOs know which LEOS are breaking the law and give them a free pass. Of all people, LEOs should not be breaking the law. Even more so, they should most certainly be held accountable for breaking the law. For, to do otherwise results in citizens' erosion of respect for the law.

Finally, to the parasitical elites, if it was physically possible to apprehend and process every person that has violated the law in the last thirty days, other than just traffic laws -- including LEOs, judges, prosecutors, lawyers, grocery clerks, doctors, engineers and etc. -- to do that within a week (7 days), society and the economy would come to a screeching halt that would send a negative ripple effect around the world. That would be certain doom.

The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I have a retired SWAT neighbor who now agrees that it has gone way too far. I would go as far as limiting the use of BDU type clothes and put COPS back in blazers and forbid military hair cuts. My neighbor calls many of these PO'S wana bees. Not good enough for the SEALS, Rangers or Green Beret or his favorite Force Recon (Semper Fi).

Have you noticed the number of shaved heads since they started doing the drug test with hair samples ?

Like your captions