User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 3:52:45 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted: Quoted: Want to search a vehicle? Get a warrant! 'OK, I can do that. Wait right here and I'll call in and get a warrant.' That's legal. Hope your butt don't get sore sittin there on the side of the road. Refusal to surrender 4th Amendment rights is not probable cause for a search or a warrant. The police have no reason to believe that your van was the one speeding away from the scene, on a road full of white vans. Like I said, get a warrant. You won't get one if "he was driving a white van and refused to submit to a search" is all the "evidence" you have. What next, interviews with all AR-15 owners??!! Yea, prolly. And what will you do? Politely accept because you "have nothing to hide"? Liberal! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 3:52:55 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted: I would think they'd wear reflective vests so they don't get run over. Traffic was stopped and was moving at 5MPH or less through the area. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 3:56:42 PM EDT
[#3]
Yep!
Definitly G36s. [img]us.f1.yahoofs.com/users/e5db3464/bc/Photos/FFX-Police02B2.jpg?bcQ1vz9Al23B2Y4Y[/img] Not this one though... [img]us.f1.yahoofs.com/users/e5db3464/bc/Photos/FFX-PoliceB.jpg?bcQ1vz9AB5w.M8gN[/img] Now... forgive me but, what the hell is a G36? --LS (i'm such a newbie) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 3:58:01 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted: They should have left the undercover boys out of the searches here. Unless detectives or coming from off duty, every one of them should be in uniforms. (not BDU's, Camo, Ninja suits etc.) (Like a bunch of damn 10 year olds). EVERYONE was needed. Have you any idea how hard it is to seal off I95 in this area?? You DON'T always have time to change. Guys are not just sitting by in fresh pressed uniforms waiting to attempt an operation of this scale. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 3:58:31 PM EDT
[#5]
The guy with the hood and sweatshirt in longshots first few photos appears to be carrying a early Colt LE carbine. I think. Cant make out the rear sight on the carry handle real well due to picture quality and the scope mount right in front.
Either way, its something that half the people on this board own, or own something even better. That is hardly a "SWAT" type weapon. Most of the Sheriffs deputies here, and also most of the officers in Glendale, Scottsdale, and Mesa carry privately owned AR carbines on patrol with them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:04:16 PM EDT
[#6]
Gee Chief Moose, My wife is washing my BDU's, no wait, the dog ate my BDU's, No wait, My BDU's are at the dry cleaners, because I like that starched freshly creased look. Yeah, yeah...Thats the ticket.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:05:21 PM EDT
[#7]
What next, interviews with all AR-15 owners??!! Nope wrong again. The rifling grooves on the bullets will eliminate many if not most AR-15s. Except for some Match target models, not many ARs have 1 in 8 barrels, but many bolt action varment rifles do. 1in12 would eliminate most new ARs but still cover many bolt rifles and older ARs 1in9 or 1in7 twists would gather the largest number of ARs but scarcely not all. But because ARs so easily change their barrels, and no one keeps track of the uppers, they probably wouldn't waste their time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:05:51 PM EDT
[#8]
What is a G36? You obviously dont play wargames : ) H&Ks latest toy. Nice space-gun looking rig. Pretty cool IMHO but I'm not sure how cool translates into usefulness. Probably why the cops have it, why the SWAT and ninjas have it, but regular military forces dont.
Why is he wearing a ski-mask? Maybe his face is cold. Maybe he likes makeing faces at sheeple as they gawk. I dont realy give a damn. If looking like a Mexican cop is up his alley, thats fine with me so long as he does his job right. Now if he, dressed like he is now, knocks down my door I'll be quite happy to ventilate the mask for him so it isnt so itchy. I'll even test the penetrative powers of the 5.45 AK round on his vest for him. Dont get me wrong, I respect cops, Grampa was a PA State Trooper for his entire adult life save for four years in the USMC during WWII. They do a job I wouldnt want to do, and most of them excercise more self restraint then I could excercise myself. OTOH 'they aint special' and they arnt above losing my respect if they act like dicks for no reason or bust down my door serving an unconstitutional writ or stun grenade and twisty-tie me on accident. Should that last case occur I will accidently make them all famous one way or another, and I've never met one single good person who actually enjoys being famous for something like that. R.G. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:06:08 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: Refusal to surrender 4th Amendment rights is not probable cause for a search or a warrant. The police have no reason to believe that your van was the one speeding away from the scene, on a road full of white vans. Like I said, get a warrant. You won't get one if "he was driving a white van and refused to submit to a search" is all the "evidence" you have. All I'm saying is... Most people are not aware of their rights. (sheeple) If I were the one trying to search your vehicle, I'd have to make a judgement call (thanks to you being so cooperative and all) and I may make it easy for you, or I may not. Depends. There are all kinds of way a LEO can make your life miserable. Legally. I don't claim to agree with it. But I pay them to do their job the best they can. What next, interviews with all AR-15 owners??!! Yea, prolly. And what will you do? Politely accept because you "have nothing to hide"? Liberal! Hardly. Jump to conclusions often? --LS |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:09:28 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: [red]maybe they wear them because it psychologically allows them do do things that they would normally consider morally reprehensible? like an executioners hood.[/red] Bingo !! This is it, exactly. If you think about it, what DScott is saying dovetails with the above perfectly, though on a lesser scale--though from the tone of his posts, I doubt he'd ever admit it. People say and do things on the net they would never do in real life--the perceived anonymity makes them believe that they can say or get away with anything, because no one knows who they really are. FWIW, I think this is one of the few things 12345678910 has said that I can agree with. A mask DOES allow the wearer to do things he might not do in the "light of day". But I don't think this kind of search is "morally reprehensible", and the JBT/anti-LE comments are unjustified in this instance. It also allows anonymity and protection for undercover cops, which is the point in this case. It's very simple, unless someone already believes otherwise, and just wants evidence for their pre-conceived ideas. Otherwise, if the searching itself was so "morally reprehensible" why aren't ALL the cops there wearing masks? I think that's why this topic has gone in this direction... there are people who take every opportunity to criticize LE, and nothing said will make any difference. My "tone" is simply in reaction to the "tone" of the cop-bashers, FWIW... I'm sorry if it offends you, I just get sick of the paranoia sometimes. Let's just hope they find these guys, and soon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:09:47 PM EDT
[#11]
The police have no reason to believe that your van was the one speeding away from the scene Yes they do. You are in the area, you are driving the type of vheicle that a half dozen to a dozen eye witnesses reported leaving the scene of the crime. Refusal to surrender 4th Amendment rights is not probable cause for a search or a warrant |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:11:59 PM EDT
[#12]
[img]www.hunting-pictures.com/members/shish/themall.jpg[/img]
I believe that masks are appropriate considering the present circumstances. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:12:38 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: Quoted: They should have left the undercover boys out of the searches here. Unless detectives or coming from off duty, every one of them should be in uniforms. (not BDU's, Camo, Ninja suits etc.) (Like a bunch of damn 10 year olds). EVERYONE was needed. Have you any idea how hard it is to seal off I95 in this area?? You DON'T always have time to change. Guys are not just sitting by in fresh pressed uniforms waiting to attempt an operation of this scale. Yes, I lived in Germantown Md. for five years. I know the area quite well. I already said, unless absolutely necessary, the cops should wear uniforms. [b](Unless detectives or coming from off duty, every one of them should be in uniforms.[/b] I understand that many were needed on this occasion--maybe some undercovers absolutely had to be there; so be it. You cannot deny the increasing prevalance of Ninja suited, masked up, machine gun toting cops for even low level operations. That was my point. Unless on a SWAT team, or undercover and pressed into service like this, they should not be permitted to wear BDU's, Ninja suits, masks etc. Simple as that. If from off duty, jeans (or whatever) plus a POLICE windbreaker and police hat would be acceptable. Not M-65 field jackets, BDU's, assault vests, web-gear, spandex, or lycra [;)] LE agencies need to get away from this Navy Seal Team 6 penis envy and get back to being a respectful symbol of authority that the common people can trust to help in times of need; looking like you are ready to take an oil rig after fast roping out of a helo is NOT the way to do it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:22:04 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: ... Unless on a SWAT team, or undercover and pressed into service like this, they should not be permitted to wear BDU's, Ninja suits, masks etc. Simple as that. Why? Seriously, why can't they use whatever equipment they want to get the job done? If they learn how to use the cool toys correctly, what difference does it make? Shouldn't they be allowed whatever is available? I'd guess that the average AR15.com user has better firearms than the average LEO, some are considerably better equipped. Lack of proper training is unacceptable, and that would include at all levels of LE. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:23:00 PM EDT
[#15]
Well I would like to thank every Officer who is working 24/7 in an attempt to find the cold blooded killers who are killing our fellow citizens. Having worked for thirteen weeks straight after 9-11 I know what a physical and mental strain they are going thru. It takes a toll on the officers as well as their family.
During such times of cricis all bets are off. In the case of NYC all of the undercover officers were sent to the land fill where they dug through what was left of the WTC to find the remains of their fellow citizens. I know that every Officer working on this case is working as if one of their own family was a victim. As usual the brave and dedicated men and woman of the United States of America heed the call and come to the defence of our country. God Bless and God Speed, MIKE. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:23:57 PM EDT
[#16]
HK G36 [img]www.hkpro.com/image/g36k.jpg[/img] You are one uuuugly mudda fucca... --LS |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:29:13 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: Quoted: ... Unless on a SWAT team, or undercover and pressed into service like this, they should not be permitted to wear BDU's, Ninja suits, masks etc. Simple as that. Why? Seriously, why can't they use whatever equipment they want to get the job done? If they learn how to use the cool toys correctly, what difference does it make? Shouldn't they be allowed whatever is available? I'd guess that the average AR15.com user has better firearms than the average LEO, some are considerably better equipped. Lack of proper training is unacceptable, and that would include at all levels of LE. Because they are the police, not the military. They are two distinctly different groups and they are kept seperate for a reason. I suppose you think they should have M60's mounted on armored vehicles to patrol the streets as well ?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:31:31 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted: HK G36 [url]www.hkpro.com/image/g36k.jpg[/url] You are one uuuugly mudda fucca... --LS I don't get why people get so hot and horny over carry handles. That one's made for a gorilla. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:33:02 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: Quoted: ... Unless on a SWAT team, or undercover and pressed into service like this, they should not be permitted to wear BDU's, Ninja suits, masks etc. Simple as that. Why? Seriously, why can't they use whatever equipment they want to get the job done? If they learn how to use the cool toys correctly, what difference does it make? Shouldn't they be allowed whatever is available? I'd guess that the average AR15.com user has better firearms than the average LEO, some are considerably better equipped. Lack of proper training is unacceptable, and that would include at all levels of LE. I already said that for SWAT etc. it's an acceptable uniform. But unless you want Joe Beat Cop to look like an SS officer, I'd say no, they should not be permitted to wear the psuedo-military garb. Policing is very much about image. Not just busting perps, dynamic entries, and no-knock raids on crack houses. Most cops (still, in 2002) never even draw their weapon during their career in anger. Yes, having modern weapons, kevlar etc. is essential to their own protection and that of the public--who could argue with that? Again, LE needs the trust of the citizen to function effectively. That's where image comes in. Do you want to be trusted, respected, or feared? SS wanted to be feared--it worked, and they were very effective at their jobs. Do we want to live in that kind of society? Of course not. I know that most (98%) of LEOs are not in the job for self-aggrandizement, fame, glory, to be heroes, or to oppress people. However, LE agencies have somehow recently glommed onto the idea that to be effective, Joe Beat Cop must resemble a Lightfighter.com catalog model. Save that stuff for when it's tactically needed, not just to look cool. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:33:49 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ... Unless on a SWAT team, or undercover and pressed into service like this, they should not be permitted to wear BDU's, Ninja suits, masks etc. Simple as that. Why? Seriously, why can't they use whatever equipment they want to get the job done? If they learn how to use the cool toys correctly, what difference does it make? Shouldn't they be allowed whatever is available? I'd guess that the average AR15.com user has better firearms than the average LEO, some are considerably better equipped. Lack of proper training is unacceptable, and that would include at all levels of LE. Because they are the police, not the military. They are two distinctly different groups and they are kept seperate for a reason. I suppose you think they should have M60's mounted on armored vehicles to patrol the streets as well ?? So only us civilians should have ARs and the cops should have popguns?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:35:26 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ... Unless on a SWAT team, or undercover and pressed into service like this, they should not be permitted to wear BDU's, Ninja suits, masks etc. Simple as that. Why? Seriously, why can't they use whatever equipment they want to get the job done? If they learn how to use the cool toys correctly, what difference does it make? Shouldn't they be allowed whatever is available? I'd guess that the average AR15.com user has better firearms than the average LEO, some are considerably better equipped. Lack of proper training is unacceptable, and that would include at all levels of LE. Because they are the police, not the military. They are two distinctly different groups and they are kept seperate for a reason. I suppose you think they should have M60's mounted on armored vehicles to patrol the streets as well ?? What's this "reason" they are supposed to be kept separate? Aren't they both instruments of public policy? What would you like to see, .38s and one bullet each? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:39:40 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ... Unless on a SWAT team, or undercover and pressed into service like this, they should not be permitted to wear BDU's, Ninja suits, masks etc. Simple as that. Why? Seriously, why can't they use whatever equipment they want to get the job done? If they learn how to use the cool toys correctly, what difference does it make? Shouldn't they be allowed whatever is available? I'd guess that the average AR15.com user has better firearms than the average LEO, some are considerably better equipped. Lack of proper training is unacceptable, and that would include at all levels of LE. Because they are the police, not the military. They are two distinctly different groups and they are kept seperate for a reason. I suppose you think they should have M60's mounted on armored vehicles to patrol the streets as well ?? So only us civilians should have ARs and the cops should have popguns?? nahh, cops and civilians should be able to own any weapon full auto, grenades, whatever |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:40:29 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ... Unless on a SWAT team, or undercover and pressed into service like this, they should not be permitted to wear BDU's, Ninja suits, masks etc. Simple as that. Why? Seriously, why can't they use whatever equipment they want to get the job done? If they learn how to use the cool toys correctly, what difference does it make? Shouldn't they be allowed whatever is available? I'd guess that the average AR15.com user has better firearms than the average LEO, some are considerably better equipped. Lack of proper training is unacceptable, and that would include at all levels of LE. Because they are the police, not the military. They are two distinctly different groups and they are kept seperate for a reason. I suppose you think they should have M60's mounted on armored vehicles to patrol the streets as well ?? What's this "reason" they are supposed to be kept separate? Aren't they both instruments of public policy? What would you like to see, .38s and one bullet each? Posse Comitatus Act, 1878 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:41:17 PM EDT
[#24]
magnum_99,
I'd agree that LE needs the public trust, but would also argue that this is one of those tactical situations where the black gear is warranted. Only a few of the cops are dressed like that here anyway. I think it presents a "pull out all the stops" kind of image, which is bound to be both frightening and reassuring to the public. Remember, they wouldn't be wearing it if they didn't have the training and permission for it. I'm not LE, but I do know that most agencies are very conservative when it comes to gear and weapons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:43:02 PM EDT
[#25]
nahh, cops and civilians should be able to own any weapon full auto, grenades, whatever You get it, Specter doesn't seem to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:47:16 PM EDT
[#26]
Posse Comitatus Act, 1878 You mean the "Klansman, Confederate Rebel, and Mexican Bandit Protection Act" of 1878 don't you? The law that permitted the ex-Rebles in the South to persecute Blacks and reempose virtual slavery through Jim Crow? The law that STILL is preventing us from protecting our southern borders from illegal infiltration from Mexico? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:48:12 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ... Unless on a SWAT team, or undercover and pressed into service like this, they should not be permitted to wear BDU's, Ninja suits, masks etc. Simple as that. Why? Seriously, why can't they use whatever equipment they want to get the job done? If they learn how to use the cool toys correctly, what difference does it make? Shouldn't they be allowed whatever is available? I'd guess that the average AR15.com user has better firearms than the average LEO, some are considerably better equipped. Lack of proper training is unacceptable, and that would include at all levels of LE. Because they are the police, not the military. They are two distinctly different groups and they are kept seperate for a reason. I suppose you think they should have M60's mounted on armored vehicles to patrol the streets as well ?? What's this "reason" they are supposed to be kept separate? Aren't they both instruments of public policy? What would you like to see, .38s and one bullet each? Posse Comitatus Act, 1878 Which essentially says you can't use the military for domestic police duties. Fine. This is a domestic law enforcement situation. I don't see any military here, do you? I see American cops with typical LE gear. What it boils down to is dealing with people problems, whether it's local/domestic or international. LE is the "law enforcement" arm of local policy in dealing with domestic people problems, and the military is the "law enforcement" arm of national policy makers in dealing with international people problems. The gear is irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:51:02 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: magnum_99, I'm not LE, but I do know that most agencies are very conservative when it comes to gear and weapons. Ha, this is not Califoristan. We arm everyone here to the teeth. [:D] --LS |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:53:39 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted:[red]Because they are the police, not the military. They are two distinctly different groups and they are kept seperate for a reason.[/red] What's this "reason" they are supposed to be kept separate? Posse Comitatus Act, 1878 Which essentially says you can't use the military for domestic police duties. Fine. just giving the reason |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:53:43 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: nahh, cops and civilians should be able to own any weapon full auto, grenades, whatever You get it, Specter doesn't seem to. I get it just fine. I have no problem with leo's having the weapons needed to do their job. But IMHO, they do not need full auto and they sure as hell don't need SAW's [b]Quoted: What's this "reason" they are supposed to be kept separate? Aren't they both instruments of public policy? [/b] Posse Comitatus Act, 1878, thats why. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 4:55:53 PM EDT
[#31]
That G36 is one neat looking clone/knockoff of an AK.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:00:31 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted: Quoted: magnum_99, I'm not LE, but I do know that most agencies are very conservative when it comes to gear and weapons. Ha, this is not Califoristan. We arm everyone here to the teeth. [:D] --LS Yeah, but we got these urban "pursuaders": [img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/DScott%2FLAPD%2520car%2Egif[/img] We're just waiting on the M60 mounts to get 'em up to full spec, just for Spectre. Dig the smiley face on the battering ram! [:P] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:02:42 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: Quoted: nahh, cops and civilians should be able to own any weapon full auto, grenades, whatever You get it, Specter doesn't seem to. I get it just fine. I have no problem with leo's having the weapons needed to do their job. But IMHO, they do not need full auto and they sure as hell don't need SAW's [b]Quoted: What's this "reason" they are supposed to be kept separate? Aren't they both instruments of public policy? [/b] Posse Comitatus Act, 1878, thats why. No, that's the *what*, not the why. Public policy is the why. What should it be? What role is LE supposed to fill? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:16:24 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: nahh, cops and civilians should be able to own any weapon full auto, grenades, whatever You get it, Specter doesn't seem to. I get it just fine. I have no problem with leo's having the weapons needed to do their job. But IMHO, they do not need full auto and they sure as hell don't need SAW's [b]Quoted: What's this "reason" they are supposed to be kept separate? Aren't they both instruments of public policy? [/b] Posse Comitatus Act, 1878, thats why. No, that's the *what*, not the why. Public policy is the why. What should it be? What role is LE supposed to fill? LE used to keep in mind the bill of rights when going about their duties, using force only when absolutly needed. The military doesn't give two shits about the rights of "the enemy" and will use force and ask questions later if it gets the job done. How many infantry will be issued pepper spray when we invade iraq? When the police start acting and training more like the military, you get police who don't give two shits about your rights ---Swat teams that kick in doors, guns blazing, because it's easier to kick ass and ask questions later. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:17:51 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted: Quoted: Why are cops stopping people in the middle of the street with no probable cause? Why are people cooperating? Stopping every white van on the road shows their utter incompetance and desperation. The probable cause for the cops stopping traffic is the death by gunshot of a citizen in Spotsylvania County a short time before this picture was taken. The citizens are cooperating because they want the cops to FIND the perps before the perps kill them or a member of their family! How's that for logic for you? Do you GET IT? It's amazing to me that for such "free minded" people here I have to repeat myself. The cops got a tip that a "white van was speeding away from the scene". No plates, no lettering, no make, nothing. (There was speculation about a Chevy Astro but that hasn't been released officially). No details about the van except that a white van. How do you single out a single white van [b]ON I-95 WHICH IS FULL OF WHITE VANS[/b]?! I'll tell you what pal...I AM desperate. I live in Stafford County just about five miles from each of the shootings down here. I AM worried about my family. I AM on the lookout constantly and I AM doing my best not to give a sniper a juicy target. Those who trade liberties and freedom for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security. You, sir, and all the people in this thread that continue to blindly overlook a massive violation of the 4th amendment, deserve neither liberty nor security. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:27:20 PM EDT
[#36]
How can it be ok to profile white cargo vans and not arabs?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:28:30 PM EDT
[#37]
When can you look at traffic in that area and NOT see a white van? All the leo are doing is scaring people and giving the shooter more stationary targets. If they are undercover types, shouldn't they be doing undercover type work to "FIND THE BAD GUYS!"? If you are going to wear camo, GET IN THE F*CKING TREES!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:30:24 PM EDT
[#38]
KBaker; nice criteria. I like the list.
DScott; John Miller is my name All; I was in a surplus store two days ago and marvelled at the selection of outerwear (sweatshirts, jackets, etc...) with POLICE emblazened across the front and or rear. This instills no instinct in me to immediately comply with a person simply because he or she is wearing a similar garment. All; We have the responsibility to comply whenever reasonable, with an effort to find a bad guy. I find these roadblocks reasonable as long as the searches and interviews are performed within the spirit of the 4th amendment. All; If they gotta wear a mask, they should be used to fulfill some other aspect of the investigation. I ain't stopping for ANYBODY in a mask. No way, no how. Especially with a madman on the loose. John Miller |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:31:00 PM EDT
[#39]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Why are cops stopping people in the middle of the street with no probable cause? Why are people cooperating? Stopping every white van on the road shows their utter incompetance and desperation. The probable cause for the cops stopping traffic is the death by gunshot of a citizen in Spotsylvania County a short time before this picture was taken. The citizens are cooperating because they want the cops to FIND the perps before the perps kill them or a member of their family! How's that for logic for you? Do you GET IT? It's amazing to me that for such "free minded" people here I have to repeat myself. The cops got a tip that a "white van was speeding away from the scene". No plates, no lettering, no make, nothing. (There was speculation about a Chevy Astro but that hasn't been released officially). No details about the van except that a white fan. How do you single out a single white van [b]ON I-95 WHICH IS FULL OF WHITE VANS[/b]?! I'll tell you what pal...I AM desperate. I live in Stafford County just about five miles from each of the shootings down here. I AM worried about my family. I AM on the lookout constantly and I AM doing my best not to give a sniper a juicy target. Those who trade liberties and freedom for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security. You, sir, and all the people in this thread that continue to blindly overlook a massive violation of the 4th amendment, deserve neither liberty nor security. How about the freedom to mow your lawn or get gas, or the liberty of your wife going the the crafts store without getting a bullet in the head or the chest? These cops work for us, doing the job we ask them to do. How would you propose they do that for us? It's not like they stop people like this on I95 every day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:42:59 PM EDT
[#40]
What's wrong with you guys. Fighting and arguing amongst each other over a few photos that you either like or don't like. Knock it off!
What I want to know is, with all these photos taking up and wasting bandwith, where the hell is Waldo? And why isn't there equal representation as well! Where is the Rainbow Coalition? I don't see any Blacks wearing those black ski (PC) masks in any of those photos. Would it be OK for a Black to wear a white ski mask? Would it piss you off? In fact, I don't recall ever seeing any Blacks wearing those ski masks at anytime while wearing "POLICE" windbreakers and bullet proof vests. WHY! And why hasn't Andy Rooney brought this up at any time in the past 30 years of his worthless bull$$$$hit. And what would happen if a witness to the shootings would call in and report that he saw the sniper drive away in a marked police car.... wearing a black ski mask... and that he was..... BLACK? You ever see a "fill in the blank" chase his own tail recently? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:45:31 PM EDT
[#41]
The masks are used for intimidation purposes.
Intimidation can be an effective control device. When people are scared they tend to do what they're told. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 5:53:04 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted: The masks are used for intimidation purposes. Intimidation can be an effective control device. When people are scared they tend to do what they're told. BINGO AGAIN !!! wow, two in one night. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 6:01:47 PM EDT
[#43]
[img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/SPECTRE%2F574609%2Ejpg[/img]
[img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/SPECTRE%2F575304%2Ejpg[/img] [img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/SPECTRE%2F575219%2Ejpg[/img] Hmmmm, and just where is that line between police and military ?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 6:03:27 PM EDT
[#44]
Something that should warm your heart...
Ananova: Town launches balaclava ban Police are stopping people from wearing balaclavas in an Aberdeenshire town because they scare elderly people. They say someone wearing a balaclava could terrify pensioners - and this constitutes a breach of the peace. Locals in Stonehaven, near Aberdeen, say it gets so cold sometimes that balaclavas are essential. As part of their campaign, officers picked up one schoolboy and seized his balaclava before driving him home to his parents. PC David McLean told The Sun: "We pulled over and told him to take the mask off. We then drove the boy home to his parents and they agreed to hand the balaclava over." His boss, Sergeant Grant Wallace, said: "The only reason people would wear them would be to hide their face. That kid could have gone round the corner and scared an old woman." PC McLean added: "If an elderly woman was coming out of the post office with her pension book and saw someone wearing a balaclava coming towards her, she would be terrified. "To put someone in that sort of fear and alarm is a breach of the peace and would be considered so by officers." A local publican said: "Sometimes it gets so cold here a balaclava is an essential piece of clothing. I don't think too many people will be handing their hats in." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 6:18:43 PM EDT
[#45]
In light of the recent events in this area I don't think they need "intimidation" to get compliance, nor do I think our resident "tough guys" would be so bold as to refuse. First and foremost you must obey the commands of a law enforcement officer above all other road signs or signals in this state. If a police officer motions you over, you pull over, white van or not. If you do not, you have just given him/her probable cause to think you have or will do something wrong.
If you have nothing to hide in the vehicle, why sweat it? I was out and about today with a loaded H&K USP40, my AR10 and Colt 1911 in the trunk, and a full bag of gear for the range, including ammo for all three guns. Drove in in the morning took a long lunch and went shooting, went back to work. I have a concealed carry permit for the pistol and the other guns were being transported correctly. While I may have faced some tough questions I have no doubt they would have let me be on my way, as I don't get nervous around officers and I certainly don't have anything to hide from them. At some point, a willingness to surrender a little "freedon" benefits the good of all people. In this case I would likely surrender my 4th amendment right to insure that we may catch this guy in an unplanned roadblock. However, I am one of the most outspoken people when it comes to protecting our Constitutional rights...hen it comes to your town lets see how you react (speaking to all the TOUGH guys). Ed |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 6:26:57 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted: In light of the recent events in this area I don't think they need "intimidation" to get compliance, nor do I think our resident "tough guys" would be so bold as to refuse. First and foremost you must obey the commands of a law enforcement officer above all other road signs or signals in this state. If a police officer motions you over, you pull over, white van or not. If you do not, you have just given him/her probable cause to think you have or will do something wrong. If you have nothing to hide in the vehicle, why sweat it? I was out and about today with a loaded H&K USP40, my AR10 and Colt 1911 in the trunk, and a full bag of gear for the range, including ammo for all three guns. Drove in in the morning took a long lunch and went shooting, went back to work. I have a concealed carry permit for the pistol and the other guns were being transported correctly. While I may have faced some tough questions I have no doubt they would have let me be on my way, as I don't get nervous around officers and I certainly don't have anything to hide from them. [red]At some point, a willingness to surrender a little "freedon" benefits the good of all people. In this case I would likely surrender my 4th amendment right to insure that we may catch this guy in an unplanned roadblock. However, I am one of the most outspoken people when it comes to protecting our Constitutional rights...hen it comes to your town lets see how you react (speaking to all the TOUGH guys).[/red] Ed If you are willing to give up a "little freedom" then they have already won. BTW, just how much is "a little freedom" ?? How sad to be considered a "tough guy" simply because I don't think I should have to give up ANY of our rights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 6:27:01 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: It's amazing to me that for such "free minded" people here I have to repeat myself. The cops got a tip that a "white van was speeding away from the scene". No plates, no lettering, no make, nothing. (There was speculation about a Chevy Astro but that hasn't been released officially). No details about the van except that a white van. How do you single out a single white van [b]ON I-95 WHICH IS FULL OF WHITE VANS[/b]?! The law dogs knew about the white van. They didn't single out [b]a[/b] white van...they stopped [b]ALL[/b] white vans of all makes and models. Witnesses at the scene gave them a good description this time. Several motorists were reportedly bumped out of the way by the perps as they fled onto the interstate. Some witnesses provided a description of a sign on the side of the van. I heard this on the radio and on the TV in my office. If the cops were admitting it to the newsies...I have a suspicion that it just might be true in this case...or do you think that is also part of a conspiracy to take away your 4th Amendment rights? Those who trade liberties and freedom for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security. You, sir, and all the people in this thread that continue to blindly overlook a massive violation of the 4th amendment, deserve neither liberty nor security. Blindly overlook? Not a chance in Hell, Sir! You are sadly mistaken. Since you seem so preoccupied with your 4th Amendment rights, why not let's read it for a sec: [b]Amendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against [red][u]unreasonable[/u] searches and seizures[/red], shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[/b] The part in red...notice the ambiguity of that phrase? How YOU define [b]unreasonable[/b] just might be different from the manner in which the courts might define it, especially in this case. I don't think any reasonable and innocent person would refuse to permit a permissive search of his/her vehicle in this case. You certainly can, and if I were an officer on the scene, I think I would respect that unless I had guidance from the government's attorneys to the contrary. Then, I would simply place your vehicle on the side of the road and get a warrant as you demand. Since we are real busy right now, it may be a few hours until that warrant is delivered into your hands...but we'll get it. What makes you think that because I disagree with you I should have my basic rights taken away? Finally...you still have not answered my prime question: You and others have complained about the cops' methods. What would YOU do to locate these perps? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 6:43:10 PM EDT
[#48]
Spectre:
Cool icon by the way....... You obviously have a reading comprehension issue. I said specifically, "in this case". If caught tonight 11 October...then on 12 October you better have a court ordered warrant to search my vehicle and it better have a VIN on it. Otherwise, ain't happening. Your armchair QB'ing is left to Arizona or whatever state you may be in right now. Here in the DC Metro area we have a capable sharpshooter picking people off and the cops know dick. BTW, I'm sure the governer of Virginia could declare a state of emergency and start imposing something similar to Martial Law if it gets bad enough, thrill killer boy will likely search out cops then as targets, but at least we could search every car as it travelled around the area. As I said, when it comes to your town, then talk. Also, when you mouth of to a cop here, now in this climate, call me. I'd love to videotape the drama for my greatest "hits" tape. Make sure you are driving around in a white van with ladder racks and make sure you say mean and nasty things about your 4th amendment rights. When you get the clue that this is serious, call back, because at this point you aren't in fear for your life while gasing your car. Are you? Didn't think so........ Ed |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 6:49:16 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted: How about the freedom to mow your lawn or get gas, or the liberty of your wife going the the crafts store without getting a bullet in the head or the chest? These cops work for us, doing the job we ask them to do. How would you propose they do that for us? It's not like they stop people like this on I95 every day. Congrats DScott! Are you aware that you sound just like a statement from the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence? They tell us all the time that "ordinary people have the right not to be affected by gun violence" all the time - guess you agree with them, eh? When the SHTF we finally get to see what people are really like as panic brings their true feelings and beliefs to the surface. It's also an accurate barometer in determining who will really fight for their guns when the government comes for them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2002 6:56:11 PM EDT
[#50]
Again another pointless post.....
SHTF? This is NOT SHTF. I can not legally go out hunting for this nutcase, despite what you all in all these other lands far off may think. While I am fully capable, there are things called vigilante laws, which are viewed as strictly as murder, rape, etc. When the S does hit the Fan. Firing from your window will look normal and garner appaulse from your neighbors for whom you are fighting for. Get your head out of your ass long enough to realize that there is very little legal ground to stnad on for the average citizen. If I see this nut job take a shot and I am within range of the gun I have on me at the time you better believe I will shoot. However, that opportunity has not presented itself, not even to the State Trooper that was 50 yards away this AM. Get real.......again armchair QB's blow ass. Please Wyatt Earp come here and bail us out. Oh, please, oh please? Ed |
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
