NYPD's Finest?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
281

[quote]Digital Chainsaw wrote:
[/quote]

DC, you must have some first hand knowledge about border towns. : ) I can most assuredly say that he has never lived in a 25 mile radius to ANY US border.

If he did, he would know that there are, in fact, cities that border the US, and in fact there are Border Patrol Agents patrolling those cities. That in fact the crime rates in border cities are considerably higher than interior cities.

If he knew anything about Federal laws he would also know that Border Patrol Agents enforce ALL federal laws, not just Immigration Laws. He would probably also know that we work hand in hand with ALL local, state and Federal agencies. Sometimes we are their only backup. Domestics, Fights, riots, traffic stops, traffic accidents, first responders, EMTs, rescues, K-9, Air and Boat Patrol, translators. Agents do it all.

Aside from that though, he most definitely doesn’t know that High Risk traffic stops and urban encounters are common place for Border Patrol Agents.

NDM tried to discredit me because he didn’t think I had civilian law enforcement experience, and therefor I must not be qualified to make an assessment of the tactics the NYPD used in this incident.

But me trying to explain all of that to him would be a waste of time. We could start a whole other thread about what NDM doesn’t know.

282

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I was told by NMD that this is not a race issue…but I can’t help but wonder where all of the non-minorities are that all of this happens to easing my suspicion.[/quote]

I don’t necessarily agree or disagree that the NYPD issue was a race issue.

However, you don’t hear about incidents like this involving non-minorities because it’s not controversial and therefor deemed not news worthy.

283

[quote]Professor X wrote:
NDM wrote:
If they had not acted like criminals, which they are, they wouldn’t be in this mess right now. If you’re going to act like a gun toting criminal, expect to be treated as such.

Bullshit. That is like saying, “if they had not looked like criminals, they wouldn’t be in this mess”. Until a crime is committed, to assume someone is definitely going to commit a crime is not what the law is. [/quote]

Very good point. That is why we utilize UC cops. To “catch” them in the act.

[quote]
Often these assumptions are based on profiling, something I have been a victim of several times in the past. According to some cops, I apparently “look” like a criminal. I “fit the profile”…ie. a large bald black man who is breathing. Mind you, this has even come from other BLACK cops before you act as if the race of the officer makes a big difference.[/quote]

I agree. The race of the officer doesn’t make a difference, but is not limited to blacks. Asian and Hispanic profiling stands to be just as true. It all depends on the environment.

[quote]
No one has written that these guys were angels, however, what does that matter if the reason this one undercover was getting involved WAS NOT because of the altercation outside? They wait until they get in the car to drive away with no one hurt? If no one was hurt, why get involved now? If they were so concerned about the safety of the individual being threatened, why didn’t he jump in THEN?! [/quote]

I have said it before, their criminal pasts has absolutely nothing to do with how this incident went down. It was not known they weren’t “angels” until after the incident. The media brought up their criminal records to stir even more controversy.

284

[quote]MaloVerde wrote:
Digital Chainsaw wrote:

DC, you must have some first hand knowledge about border towns. : ) I can most assuredly say that he has never lived in a 25 mile radius to ANY US border.

If he did, he would know that there are, in fact, cities that border the US, and in fact there are Border Patrol Agents patrolling those cities. That in fact the crime rates in border cities are considerably higher than interior cities.

If he knew anything about Federal laws he would also know that Border Patrol Agents enforce ALL federal laws, not just Immigration Laws. He would probably also know that we work hand in hand with ALL local, state and Federal agencies. Sometimes we are their only backup. Domestics, Fights, riots, traffic stops, traffic accidents, first responders, EMTs, rescues, K-9, Air and Boat Patrol, translators. Agents do it all.

Aside from that though, he most definitely doesn’t know that High Risk traffic stops and urban encounters are common place for Border Patrol Agents.

NDM tried to discredit me because he didn’t think I had civilian law enforcement experience, and therefor I must not be qualified to make an assessment of the tactics the NYPD used in this incident.

But me trying to explain all of that to him would be a waste of time. We could start a whole other thread about what NDM doesn’t know. [/quote]

I tried to PM you, but it must not have gone through. Anyway, I can see a major American city from my balcony, so you’re statement about me living no where near a border is completely false. I’ve not once heard about BP doing anything besides “border” issues. Maybe in small US towns you guys act as the local police, but where I live, I have never seen that happen. And there have been many riots and what not in the US city that I am speaking of. I’m not saying that you don’t enforce laws in US cities, but I have never seen it.

It’s not that I was trying to discredit you. You brought your law enforcement experience into the argument, and I questioned your law enforcement experience. I was under the impression we were allowed to question law enforcement officals, hence the reason for this thread being started. If you wanted me to trust your opinion based on your experience as an LEO, then I think it’s fine that I questioned your experience. I wasn’t trying to be a dick about it. So anyway, I am going to apologize if I have offended you.

I think that you’ve thrown some comments my way that were uncalled for, but it’s ok. I don’t expect you to apologize.

285

[quote]NDM wrote:
I tried to PM you, but it must not have gone through. Anyway, I can see a major American city from my balcony, so you’re statement about me living no where near a border is completely false. I’ve not once heard about BP doing anything besides “border” issues. Maybe in small US towns you guys act as the local police, but where I live, I have never seen that happen. And there have been many riots and what not in the US city that I am speaking of. I’m not saying that you don’t enforce laws in US cities, but I have never seen it.[/quote]

You can see a major US city from your balcony? Do you even live in the US? Or in a 25 mile radius of the border like I specified?

Although in some states, agents do have Peace Officer authority, I never said BP act as local police, and I never said BP responded to ALL incidents in every city in America.

And because you have never seen it, makes you fully qualified to outline what a BP Agent does and does not do?

[quote]
It’s not that I was trying to discredit you. You brought your law enforcement experience into the argument, and I questioned your law enforcement experience.[/quote]

Huh? That’s the same thing.

[quote]
I was under the impression we were allowed to question law enforcement officals, hence the reason for this thread being started. [/quote]

The only LE official you have questioned is me. I don’t live in New York and wasn’t involved in this incident.[quote]

If you wanted me to trust your opinion based on your experience as an LEO, then I think it’s fine that I questioned your experience. I wasn’t trying to be a dick about it. So anyway, I am going to apologize if I have offended you.[/quote]

I never asked you to “trust” my opinion. I offered it to the thread as my point of view. You looked at my profile and saw that I was an agent, I didn’t offer that info to you, until you called me out. You question my experience but have none yourself.

And you don’t have to apologize to me for anything. I’m not easily offended. I will continue to give my opinion regardless of who agrees or disagrees.

I have agreed AND disagreed with many of the same people on this site. But unlike you have shown, I respect other people’s opinions and keep an open mind.

Have I called you a name or threatened you? The only comments I’ve thrown your way has been to identify that you are a biased cop cheerleader with absolutely zero experience to base your lopsided opinions on.

For that I am not sorry.

286

[quote]MaloVerde wrote:
…[/quote]

I think you were offended by my comments. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have jumped on the defence like you did. That’s why I apologized.

No, I do not live in the US. I live across the river from Detroit.

Cop cheerleader with zero experience? You also thought I didn’t live anywhere near a border, when in fact, my house is probably closer to a border crossing than yours. Good guess though…

287

[quote]NDM wrote:
MaloVerde wrote:
…

I think you were offended by my comments. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have jumped on the defence like you did. That’s why I apologized. [/quote]

??? Providing information contrary to yours is being defensive?

[quote]
No, I do not live in the US. I live across the river from Detroit.[/quote]

This invalidates all of your statements. Our presence in Detroit is very well known.

[quote]
Cop cheerleader with zero experience? You also thought I didn’t live anywhere near a border, when in fact, my house is probably closer to a border crossing than yours. Good guess though…[/quote]

So you’re saying I’m wrong about your experience? List it.

Closer to a border crossing than me? I doubt it. I too live within eyesight of the border. But who cares? Why continue to make assumptions about things you don’t know?

Being that you don’t even live in the US, I shouldn’t expect you to know anything of the USBP, or any department or agency in the US for that matter.

Had I known in the first place, I wouldn’t have indulged you. You should be asking questions instead of providing your “input”.

288

[quote]MaloVerde wrote:
NDM wrote:
MaloVerde wrote:
…

I think you were offended by my comments. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have jumped on the defence like you did. That’s why I apologized.

??? Providing information contrary to yours is being defensive?

No, I do not live in the US. I live across the river from Detroit.

This invalidates all of your statements. Our presence in Detroit is very well known.

Cop cheerleader with zero experience? You also thought I didn’t live anywhere near a border, when in fact, my house is probably closer to a border crossing than yours. Good guess though…

So you’re saying I’m wrong about your experience? List it.

Closer to a border crossing than me? I doubt it. I too live within eyesight of the border. But who cares? Why continue to make assumptions about things you don’t know?

Being that you don’t even live in the US, I shouldn’t expect you to know anything of the USBP, or any department or agency in the US for that matter.

Had I known in the first place, I wouldn’t have indulged you. You should be asking questions instead of providing your “input”.

[/quote]

Well, it appears as if maybe the US BP has a different role than the CDN Border Agents. Because we are so close to the US, we are exposed to Detroit’s media. I have never heard of, or seen BP in the city of Detroit with the exception of the border. You say the presence is well known. I don’t know who it is well known to, but it sure isn’t the people in this area. Maybe everyone in your organization knows about it, but the people over here don’t.

Experience pertaining to LE? None, other than school. That doesn’t mean I can’t have an opinion on the matter just like the other posters on this thread. I never claimed to be a cop. However, in the military we are trained to extract subjects from vehicles. If the car was to move forward and hit our personnel, we eliminate that threat by shooting the vehicle. It’s better to be judged by 12, than carried by 6.

I’m not always on “the cops side”. I just don’t think the cops were wrong in this particular incident. There have been a few times when I have seen something on TV and thought to myself “That’s fucked up.” Those moments are few and far between though, as I tend to remember a lot of the good things that LEO do on a daily basis.

This debate got pretty ugly. It was supposed to be about the issues. It has shifted too far from that. I wouldn’t post this here, but I can’t seem to get through a PM to you. Anyway, no hard feelings, and stay safe on your job. Best wishes.

289

[quote]MaloVerde wrote:
Professor X wrote:
NDM wrote:

I have said it before, their criminal pasts has absolutely nothing to do with how this incident went down. It was not known they weren’t “angels” until after the incident. The media brought up their criminal records to stir even more controversy. [/quote]

The only reason why their criminal pasts matter is the credibility issue in regards to the question of whether the officers identified themselves.

290

[quote]JD430 wrote:
MaloVerde wrote:
Professor X wrote:
NDM wrote:

I have said it before, their criminal pasts has absolutely nothing to do with how this incident went down. It was not known they weren’t “angels” until after the incident. The media brought up their criminal records to stir even more controversy.

The only reason why their criminal pasts matter is the credibility issue in regards to the question of whether the officers identified themselves.

[/quote]

I agree.

291

[quote]Professor X wrote:

The issue is, were these guys even aware that the undercover cop was actually a cop, and were the cops justified in action at all since the threat was apparently over. quote]

Hey genius. The “threat” part wasnt bumping chests with 4 other clowns in the parking lot ok? Let me slow it down for you - the “threat” was about getting a gun. Ok?
They. Said. They. Had. A. Gun.

Cops (and most others who aren’t so emotionally biased against cops or whatever) can see that just because no one threw a punch the “threat” was NOT over.
The THREAT was all about getting/having a GUN.

In an earlier post you claimed I was misreading what you said? No, go re-read yourself.

As for your “point” about not everyone speaking about this incident in the press stating to your satisfaction that the UC id’d himself…go read my response to pga a few pages back.

I tried to explain to him that yes in all liklihood the UC did id himself. There is NO reason not to and in fact not doing so would SERIOUSLY INCREASE THE DANGER HE HIMSELF (ALONE)WAS FACING AT THAT MOMENT and he no doubt fucking KNOWS this.
Seems only you dont/cant.Well and pga too but he’s pretty transparent on police issues

If you are still clinging to he said/they said about the ID - who is holding more credibility in this particular situation?

Let’s add this up with just the facts ok professor? Lets take the knee jerk out of it - if you can.
This is what you are arguing:

Three assholes ALL with prior weapons charges, in and out of the criminal justice system for years, getting into a confrontation outside a club, a club that is so shitty there are already UC cops all working it for exactly this type of bullshit (fights, guns, drugs etc) ,talking shit about getting a gun, and then top it off by hitting the UC officer standing IN FRONT OF THEIR CAR JUST LIKE A COP WAVING A BADGE AND SCREAMING FREEZE POLICE.

Hmmm. Do I believe THEM when they say “oh no we never knew he was a cop, we are just poor victims here”… or do i believe the UC officer, NONE of which was wearing a vest but STILL confronted those assholes like he was sworn to do? Oh yeah and NONE of these cops has ever had any prior shootings so please-no bullshit “argument” that they somehow couldnt wait to just open fire on some hapless innocents.

It makes me wonder all about your references to your rough and tough “old neighborhood”. I mean, if it was really a hard place and you were shaped by it…how are you so clueless when it comes to the statements made by the suspects? Seems to me you should be able to recognize some complete bullshit from some hood tough guys.

292

[quote]Digital Chainsaw wrote:
david dunne wrote:

Ok good. Now read the part about trying to keep four suspects CONTAINED

…inside a 3000 lb. battering ram…

so they could be taken down all at once instead of trying to rush one UC up against four suspects

…which is kind of a puzzling situation since the outside backup was aware of a potential gun threat from the suspect a full hour before he and his friends exited the club. That either means that

A) Instead of getting into more tactically advantageous takedown positions, the UC cops outside in the unmarked mini vans found something else to do with their time.

B) The UC cops outside decided it was best for uniformed backup to handle the situation, but an hour was not enough time for backup to arrive.

Granted, the UC’s had no way of knowing whether the suspect would exit the club in an hour or a few seconds, so “B” was probably (and understandably) not implemented.

where at the least you have a chaotic footchase in four directions and at worse one or more goes for a gun and the officer is now involved in a shoot out with 1-4 suspects on an open street.

Put it this way - if you were the UC would you bumrush the four guys like a movie hero or would you take into account the public’s safety too and try for the conatined scenario?

[/quote]

So the point is what?
The way it sounds to me the cop is following them hoping backup will get in place for it and when they dont get there in time (for about 100 real world reasons) he HAS to initiate the stop himself. He does the only thing he can do at that point.

So your argument is he should have rushed all four guys on the sidewalk, in plain clothes, from behind, with back up even farther away at that point, with no radio communication to tell them it’s going down righ now?

Oh ok. Thanks for clearing that up.
You would survive all of one day out here.

293

[quote]Professor X wrote:
NDM wrote:
If they had not acted like criminals, which they are, they wouldn’t be in this mess right now. If you’re going to act like a gun toting criminal, expect to be treated as such.

Bullshit. That is like saying, “if they had not looked like criminals, they wouldn’t be in this mess”. Until a crime is committed, to assume someone is definitely going to commit a crime is not what the law is. Often these assumptions are based on profiling, something I have been a victim of several times in the past. According to some cops, I apparently “look” like a criminal. I “fit the profile”…ie. a large bald black man who is breathing. Mind you, this has even come from other BLACK cops before you act as if the race of the officer makes a big difference.

No one has written that these guys were angels, however, what does that matter if the reason this one undercover was getting involved WAS NOT because of the altercation outside? They wait until they get in the car to drive away with no one hurt? If no one was hurt, why get involved now? If they were so concerned about the safety of the individual being threatened, why didn’t he jump in THEN?!

No, you would rather overlook that…because you read an article once where a cop got shot. [/quote]

Last time professor then I give up.
You ask why didn’t he “jump in THEN”?

I have an educated guess.
Because it’s stupid tactics to “jump in” one uc officer against four assholes claiming to have weapons- on a sidewalk running up from behind in plain clothes- while there is no back up present. Especially when you have called for back up and they are supposed to be coming and you can take them down when they arrive.

The odds of it being safer for EVERYONE involved increase if there are 6 cops doing the takedown rather than your tv cop show fueled fantasy of having one uc officer rush all four guys on the sidewalk by himself.

I wont try anymore and I suggest nobody else try either. He cant/wont understand why the cops “got involved” if no one was hurt from an almost fistfight. He doesnt understand the threat about having a gun was the threat not the chest bumping. He has repeated it for numerous pages now.

All the whining about how “I fit the profile” etc etc is old sad bullshit everyone has heard before and it is clear to me thats what is fueling his “arguments” aginst this (and other) police topics ,because it sure as shit isn’t logic or facts.

294

[quote]NDM wrote:
It’s funny. The only argument you guys have are personal attacks on me. It just goes to show your character, and lack of intelligent debate. You guys need to get a life. Anyone who has the time to post nearly 15000 times needs to leave the house every once in a while. [/quote]

Thats is a fair point. hahahaaaa

295

A little update.

296

Bump.

297

LOL, why the random bump?

298

[quote]PGA wrote:
LOL, why the random bump?[/quote]

To answer his own question about finding the quotes proving his “distrust” of police in general.

JeffR

299

[quote]PGA wrote:
LOL, why the random bump?[/quote]

It came up in the other thread.

300

[quote]JeffR wrote:
PGA wrote:
LOL, why the random bump?

To answer his own question about finding the quotes proving his “distrust” of police in general.

JeffR

[/quote]

Why should anyone trust the police?

They are armed, they have special rights under the law and there has not been one police department in the history of mankind where a healthy part of said department did not use their privileges to enrich themselves or gain other advantages.

At best they are politicians in uniform which would be kind of institutionalized corruption.

If you have some power, you are not to be trusted, period.