M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Aug 1, 2013 10:27am
Or, the more reason to be more communicative.....thus the guns aren't needed.
Reading the article they executed a warrant, so I don't see the problem with that. The problem is recently we've seen many situations where unannounced and ill-advised raids have resulted in harm to LE, the citizens and their animals...and unfortunately in many situations involved nothing more than a misdemeanor offense. It is unnecessary and dangerous.
Reading the article they executed a warrant, so I don't see the problem with that. The problem is recently we've seen many situations where unannounced and ill-advised raids have resulted in harm to LE, the citizens and their animals...and unfortunately in many situations involved nothing more than a misdemeanor offense. It is unnecessary and dangerous.
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Aug 1, 2013 10:29am
That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. "Hey bad guy, please, I want to be nice to you, I am unarmed, so that means you should go peacefully!"Manhattan Buckeye;1481205 wrote:Or, the more reason to be more communicative.....thus the guns aren't needed.
It wasn't a no-knock, which is where those issues you are describing occur.Reading the article they executed a warrant, so I don't see the problem with that. The problem is recently we've seen many situations where unannounced and ill-advised raids have resulted in harm to LE, the citizens and their animals...and unfortunately in many situations involved nothing more than a misdemeanor offense. It is unnecessary and dangerous.
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Aug 1, 2013 10:32am
I guess I have less of a problem with them being armed and more of a problem with the fact that they needed 9 agents and 4 deputies and their response was to compare it to a drug bust. The show of force, IMO, is completely unnecessary. Again, that's just my opinion. With all of these federal grants to give local police departments military vehicles and shit I am leery of any and all overt shows of force like this. And yes, I get that this may be how they typically operate, but that means nothing to me. It shouldn't be how they operate.
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Aug 1, 2013 10:35am
I assume that it is because those who illegally keep wild animals are typically of the, how should I put this, meth head type. It's probably just policy due to 90% of the time they are dealing with actual criminals that end up with many more charges. I get a Ohio Outdoor Newspaper and they always have the ODNR blotter, and so often there are stories of an illegally kept wild animal raid where they end up with a meth lab, illegal guns, all kinds of shit.justincredible;1481207 wrote:I guess I have less of a problem with them being armed and more of a problem with the fact that they needed 9 agents and 4 deputies and their response was to compare it to a drug bust. The show of force, IMO, is completely unnecessary. Again, that's just my opinion. With all of these federal grants to give local police departments military vehicles and shit I am leery of any and all overt shows of force like this. And yes, I get that this may be how they typically operate, but that means nothing to me. It shouldn't be how they operate.
GoChiefs
Posts: 16,754
Aug 1, 2013 10:38am
LJ;1481210 wrote:I assume that it is because those who illegally keep wild animals are typically of the, how should I put this, meth head type. It's probably just policy due to 90% of the time they are dealing with actual criminals that end up with many more charges. I get a Ohio Outdoor Newspaper and they always have the ODNR blotter, and so often there are stories of an illegally kept wild animal raid where they end up with a meth lab, illegal guns, all kinds of shit.
And that other 10% a little common sense needs to be used. It was an animal shelter.
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Aug 1, 2013 10:38am
"That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. "Hey bad guy, please, I want to be nice to you, I am unarmed, so that means you should go peacefully!""
You might need to turn on Channel 9 Lawrence.
The conversation goes something like this, "Hello Mr. X, I am Officer Y from Z Department and we have reason to believe that you are harboring an animal unlawfully and that the animal may pose a danger to our environment breaking B laws. We have secured a warrant from Judge D to enter your premises to investigate the matter and would appreciate your cooperation."
Or on the other hand you can send in the SWAT team for a deer - obviously nothing bad ever happened from that (sarcasm alert).
In the former example, there is a trust built, and even if it doesn't work, even if the guy is a jerk then you can perhaps move on to stronger force. Unfortunately we've got law enforcement that have adapted the latter scenario - got a warrant, tear the house down!
You might need to turn on Channel 9 Lawrence.
The conversation goes something like this, "Hello Mr. X, I am Officer Y from Z Department and we have reason to believe that you are harboring an animal unlawfully and that the animal may pose a danger to our environment breaking B laws. We have secured a warrant from Judge D to enter your premises to investigate the matter and would appreciate your cooperation."
Or on the other hand you can send in the SWAT team for a deer - obviously nothing bad ever happened from that (sarcasm alert).
In the former example, there is a trust built, and even if it doesn't work, even if the guy is a jerk then you can perhaps move on to stronger force. Unfortunately we've got law enforcement that have adapted the latter scenario - got a warrant, tear the house down!
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Aug 1, 2013 10:44am
There is nothing to show that they didn't do that.Manhattan Buckeye;1481212 wrote:"That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. "Hey bad guy, please, I want to be nice to you, I am unarmed, so that means you should go peacefully!""
You might need to turn on Channel 9 Lawrence.
The conversation goes something like this, "Hello Mr. X, I am Officer Y from Z Department and we have reason to believe that you are harboring an animal unlawfully and that the animal may pose a danger to our environment breaking B laws. We have secured a warrant from Judge D to enter your premises to investigate the matter and would appreciate your cooperation."
They didn't send in a SWAT team for a deer.Or on the other hand you can send in the SWAT team for a deer - obviously nothing bad ever happened from that (sarcasm alert).
They didn't get a warrant and tear the house down. They got a warrant, showed up, and peacefully took the animal.In the former example, there is a trust built, and even if it doesn't work, even if the guy is a jerk then you can perhaps move on to stronger force. Unfortunately we've got law enforcement that have adapted the latter scenario - got a warrant, tear the house down!
Give me a break :rolleyes:
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Aug 1, 2013 10:44am
Because policies are made to be broken right?GoChiefs;1481211 wrote:And that other 10% a little common sense needs to be used. It was an animal shelter.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Aug 1, 2013 10:45am
Why would we care how many officers were used?
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Aug 1, 2013 10:46am
Because the people who run the shelter are upset over the deer being euthanized. Hell, they even plan to sue over it. There are absolutely no indications in this story that everything was anything other than professional and peaceful.se-alum;1481217 wrote:Why would we care how many officers were used?
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Aug 1, 2013 10:48am
^^^
Because tax dollars pay for them.
Aside from the Constitutionally incorrect and borderline criminal actions of the VA ABC, what brought everyone together (Reps and Dems...not to take this to the political forum) was why 6 agents were needed - 4 of which travelled more than 50 miles on a two day "sting" to make 10 misdemeanor arrests, and to falsely arrest a 20 year old girl buying water.
My guess is that why people care is similar. Is this the best use for our public funds?
Because tax dollars pay for them.
Aside from the Constitutionally incorrect and borderline criminal actions of the VA ABC, what brought everyone together (Reps and Dems...not to take this to the political forum) was why 6 agents were needed - 4 of which travelled more than 50 miles on a two day "sting" to make 10 misdemeanor arrests, and to falsely arrest a 20 year old girl buying water.
My guess is that why people care is similar. Is this the best use for our public funds?
GoChiefs
Posts: 16,754
Aug 1, 2013 10:51am
LJ;1481215 wrote:Because policies are made to be broken right?
Right, because they never break policy. :rolleyes:
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Aug 1, 2013 10:52am
What the fuck does that have to do with this? This case had no arrests, no false arrests, no violence, and a valid warrant. Again, you make a stupid comparison.Manhattan Buckeye;1481222 wrote:^^^
Because tax dollars pay for them.
Aside from the Constitutionally incorrect and borderline criminal actions of the VA ABC, what brought everyone together (Reps and Dems...not to take this to the political forum) was why 6 agents were needed - 4 of which travelled more than 50 miles on a two day "sting" to make 10 misdemeanor arrests, and to falsely arrest a 20 year old girl buying water.
My guess is that why people care is similar. Is this the best use for our public funds?
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Aug 1, 2013 10:53am
Right, they shouldn't. Break policy, people get pissed. Follow policy, people get pissed.GoChiefs;1481225 wrote:Right, because they never break policy. :rolleyes:
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Aug 1, 2013 10:55am
So 12-13 agents didn't get paid?
I'm pretty sure they weren't working for free, and if I was a taxpayer in that jurisdiction I would question why their time is being spent on this.
Do you understand that point?
I'm pretty sure they weren't working for free, and if I was a taxpayer in that jurisdiction I would question why their time is being spent on this.
Do you understand that point?
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Aug 1, 2013 10:56am
How do you know how many officers are typically on duty at that time? How do you know that no extra money was spent? Do you understand that you are making a lot of assumptions based on absolutely nothing?Manhattan Buckeye;1481232 wrote:So 12-13 agents didn't get paid?
I'm pretty sure they weren't working for free, and if I was a taxpayer in that jurisdiction I would question why their time is being spent on this.
Do you understand that point?
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Aug 1, 2013 11:01am
In the subject of this case, I don't. But it doesn't appear clear to me why so many people were needed. In the Virginia case I know everything about the area, know for sure that the head of the ABC might be forced to resign and that probably 3 of the officers will be bought out because it is an outrage and the Governor is under fire for other reasons. The analogy is that in both situations there doesn't seem to be any acceptance of accountability or efficient use of resources.
Perhaps it took 12-13 tax-payer funded people to execute a warrant - glad I don't live in that jurisdiction.
BTW LJ - negative 20 reps
Perhaps it took 12-13 tax-payer funded people to execute a warrant - glad I don't live in that jurisdiction.
BTW LJ - negative 20 reps
Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Aug 1, 2013 11:17am
Well, yeah! He's not...uh, after looking at the mod forum discussion on this, we'll just delete the final word I used in this sentence. Wouldn't want to be breaking any rules or anything like that, since I'm a good person!GoChiefs;1481186 wrote:Awwww, someone's feelings are hurt.
G
Gardens35
Posts: 4,929
Aug 1, 2013 11:29am
The number of people assumed to be on the property/and the size of the property to be searched are two factors (of many) considered when determining the manpower required.
Enforcer
Posts: 2,140
Aug 1, 2013 12:25pm
The show of force is just an intimidation factor by the DNR, when I was Youngerthe ODNR brought 6 armed Wardens to My work and escorted Me out to ask Me questions over My cousin poaching a Deer
redstreak one
Posts: 1,152
Aug 1, 2013 12:25pm
The article stated they used aerial reconnaissance! That right there tells me that public funds were being abused! How much did that cost? A quote from the story, "The warden drafted an affidavit for the search warrant, complete with aerial photos in which he described getting himself into a position where he was able to see the fawn going in and out of the barn." I know some of you have hard ons for arguing with each other and completely taking the extreme stance one way or the other, but that IMO is a waste of public money.
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Aug 1, 2013 12:32pm
ODNR here has planes in the air for weeks at a time to find small Marijuana grow ops. From what I understand is that many states almost constantly have planes in the air.redstreak one;1481315 wrote:The article stated they used aerial reconnaissance! That right there tells me that public funds were being abused! How much did that cost? A quote from the story, "The warden drafted an affidavit for the search warrant, complete with aerial photos in which he described getting himself into a position where he was able to see the fawn going in and out of the barn." I know some of you have hard ons for arguing with each other and completely taking the extreme stance one way or the other, but that IMO is a waste of public money.
B
BoatShoes
Posts: 5,703
Aug 1, 2013 12:32pm
I think, whatever the particular facts of this situation, it's more useful to view this particular case as a metaphor for how agencies of all types are increasingly becoming more militaristic. People don't have the image their law enforcers as Officer Smith walking his beat with a smile on his face, etc.
I mean jeez Murphy and Louis went after Clarence Boddiker and his gang of thugs all by themselves with just hand guns.....:thumbup:
I mean jeez Murphy and Louis went after Clarence Boddiker and his gang of thugs all by themselves with just hand guns.....:thumbup:
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Aug 1, 2013 12:32pm
Good. Hope he got what he deserved too.Enforcer;1481314 wrote:The show of force is just an intimidation factor by the DNR, when I was Youngerthe ODNR brought 6 armed Wardens to My work and escorted Me out to ask Me questions over My cousin poaching a Deer
B
BoatShoes
Posts: 5,703
Aug 1, 2013 12:34pm
Yeah because it would be a much better idea for law enforcement agencies to draft affidavits based on half-assed evidence (cough...Zimmerman...cough).redstreak one;1481315 wrote:The article stated they used aerial reconnaissance! That right there tells me that public funds were being abused! How much did that cost? A quote from the story, "The warden drafted an affidavit for the search warrant, complete with aerial photos in which he described getting himself into a position where he was able to see the fawn going in and out of the barn." I know some of you have hard ons for arguing with each other and completely taking the extreme stance one way or the other, but that IMO is a waste of public money.