Detroit Police search for guns

imported post

http://www.freep.com/article/20100606/NEWS01/6060442/Cops-prowl-Detroit-for-guns

Did anyone else see this article. There stopping people just for walking down the street. Great city isn't it.

imported post

illegal much?

watch for a lawsuit and/or a cop getting shot by a citizen(not having to be a criminal,mind you)

imported post

.

imported post

yeah, it's BS. a while back they ran an article about how DPD was pulling people over for minor infractions like cracked windshields and broken tail lights. not necessarily wrong on the surface, but they were using a team of paramilitary thugs in black with automatic rifles. then they would somehow convince, coerce, lie or whatever to get the person they stopped to allow a vehicle search. even if they ask nicely, is the average citizen going to say no to a vehicle search when looking down the barrel of a rifle?

imported post

smellslikemichigan wrote:

yeah, it's BS. a while back they ran an article about how DPD was pulling people over for minor infractions like cracked windshields and broken tail lights. not necessarily wrong on the surface, but they were using a team of paramilitary thugs in black with automatic rifles. then they would somehow convince, coerce, lie or whatever to get the person they stopped to allow a vehicle search. even if they ask nicely, is the average citizen going to say no to a vehicle search when looking down the barrel of a rifle?

Click to expand...

http://www.wsu.edu/~wldciv/world_civ_reader/world_civ_reader_2/mao.html

Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tung

"Problems of War and Strategy" (November 6, 1938)

"Every Communist must grasp the truth, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

And I would suggest that all tyrants, large and small, understand that principle exceptionally well.

imported post

"To yield to force is an act of necessity, not of will; it is at best an act of prudence. In what sense can it be a moral duty ... once might is made to be right, cause and effect are reversed, and every force which overcomes another force inherits the right which belonged to the vanquished. As soon as man can obey with impunity, his disobedience becomes legitimate; and the strongest is always right, the only problem is how to become the strongest. But what can be the validity of a right which perishes with the force on which it rests? If force compels obedience, there is no need to invoke duty to obey, and if force ceases to compel obedience, there is no longer any obligation. Thus the word 'right' adds nothing to what is said by 'force'; it is meaningless. 'Obey those in power.' If this means 'yield to force' the precept is sound, but superfluous; it will never, I suggest, be violated. ... If I am held up by a robber at the edge of a wood, force compels me to hand over my purse. But if I could somehow contrive to keep the purse from him, would I still be obliged in conscience to surrender it? After all, the pistol in the robber's hand is undoubtedly a power."
The Social Contract, Book I, Chapter 3: The Right of the Strongest (Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 1762).

imported post

Sweeney has seen a man hastily try to bury a handgun in the dirt as he was tackled. Another was packing an Uzi. AK47s are so common that illegal handguns and rifles barely register as abnormal.

Click to expand...

AK47s and Uzis? Really? REALLY?

I think you'd see a lot more BATF involvement if that were so, or a possible rise of crimes with Assault Weapons?

Article has a clear anti-gun bias.

-Richard-

imported post

how is this much different from the much protested arizona profiling law? since the guns and drug crimes are predominately young black males let's stop every young black male. detroit cop told me that the best thing to happen to them was the baggy hanging pants fashion. they catch 5 times more people now on foot.

imported post

kryptonian wrote:

how is this much different from the much protested arizona profiling law? since the guns and drug crimes are predominately young black males let's stop every young black male. detroit cop told me that the best thing to happen to them was the baggy hanging pants fashion. they catch 5 times more people now on foot.

Click to expand...

ROFL!.....that was pretty funny

OnT- I PERSONALLY dont see much of a problem with it, if it works it works. Im sure there not taking LEGALLY owned guns from RESPONSIBLE gun owners...so whats the problem?

imported post

American Boy With a Gun wrote:

kryptonian wrote:

how is this much different from the much protested arizona profiling law? since the guns and drug crimes are predominately young black males let's stop every young black male. detroit cop told me that the best thing to happen to them was the baggy hanging pants fashion. they catch 5 times more people now on foot.

Click to expand...

ROFL!.....that was pretty funny

OnT- I PERSONALLY dont see much of a problem with it, if it works it works. Im sure there not taking LEGALLY owned guns from RESPONSIBLE gun owners...so whats the problem?

Click to expand...

besides stopping people without cause? isn't that why we're having a picnic in marysville and why that article was in the paper?

imported post

smellslikemichigan wrote:

American Boy With a Gun wrote:

kryptonian wrote:

how is this much different from the much protested arizona profiling law? since the guns and drug crimes are predominately young black males let's stop every young black male. detroit cop told me that the best thing to happen to them was the baggy hanging pants fashion. they catch 5 times more people now on foot.

Click to expand...

ROFL!.....that was pretty funny

OnT- I PERSONALLY dont see much of a problem with it, if it works it works. Im sure there not taking LEGALLY owned guns from RESPONSIBLE gun owners...so whats the problem?

Click to expand...

besides stopping people without cause? isn't that why we're having a picnic in marysville and why that article was in the paper?

Click to expand...

The issue here isn't technicaly what their doing is illegal, it isn't. They, claim to be, only are stopping people that are breaking the law. People who are loitering, jay walking, have a broken windshield, or an out tail-light. The problem is how they approach the situation. Approaching with four to six officers with AR15s, is not cool. What should be done is two to four officers with their M&Ps HOLSTERED.

Now I do understand why they are doing what they are doing. They believe this will make the city safer, and that may be true. Also though it could make the whole "us" vs "them" mentality ALOT worse for the PD. I think if they did the normal civil approach on people instead of a felony-type stop, things would go alot better in the long run. I understand what they are doing now, to them, seems to be working great, but you get more flies with honey than vinegar.

God Bless

imported post

the first line of the article would seem to disagree with what you are saying:
"“That’s what happens when you walk in the street,” Sweeney said almost apologetically. He and his partner, Lavar Green, had tackled the young man, who had decided to run when the officers pulled up alongside him and asked how he was doing."

they tackled him for fleeing the scene of what? a question? suspicious maybe, but illegal? not likely.

imported post

"AK47s are so common that illegal handguns and rifles barely register as abnormal..."

"Detroit Sgt. Jeff Pacholski has seen every type of gun imaginable on Detroit's streets: from countless handguns tucked into waistbands to a rocket launcher too big to conceal."
-----------------------------------------------------------


Folks, that’s why I love Detroit, it’s a place where OCing needs littleif not anyjustification. It’s rapidly descending into a 3rd world country type mentality when you have criminals running around with RPGs, and AK-47s and illegal handguns barely register as "abnormal" to the authorities.

imported post

and badges

imported post

Bikenut wrote:

smellslikemichigan wrote:

yeah, it's BS. a while back they ran an article about how DPD was pulling people over for minor infractions like cracked windshields and broken tail lights. not necessarily wrong on the surface, but they were using a team of paramilitary thugs in black with automatic rifles. then they would somehow convince, coerce, lie or whatever to get the person they stopped to allow a vehicle search. even if they ask nicely, is the average citizen going to say no to a vehicle search when looking down the barrel of a rifle?

Click to expand...

http://www.wsu.edu/~wldciv/world_civ_reader/world_civ_reader_2/mao.html

Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tung

"Problems of War and Strategy" (November 6, 1938)

"Every Communist must grasp the truth, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

And I would suggest that all tyrants, large and small, understand that principle exceptionally well.

Click to expand...

Amen Brother! You speak great truth about the mindset of many in power these days!:what:

imported post

My 2 pennies on this ...

As long as the police are following the "letter of the law" when carrying out these stops, I have no problem with them.

Fact of the matter is that this is one of the very few "gun control" policies that actually does reduce violent crime: aggressive enforcement targeting illegal gun carrying.

What does letter of the law mean? The police must have reasonable suspicion to stop someone, detain them and do a Terry search (and the courts have ruled that someone who takes off running at the sight of the police gives them RS) ... they must have probable cause to arrest and do a full search. They can only draw and point their own weapons in response to a credible threat of deadly force.

So I agree with the person who said that if the cops are surrounding people and pointing assault rifles at them ... and only only THEN asking for consent to search, they are breaking the law, and I can't support that kind of tactics.

imported post

I happen to know from experiences of friends of mine that some DPD officers are about as concerned with the bill of rights as Dirty Harry. But I can't see anything in the article which contradicts the law.

imported post

There is a right and a wrong way to do things. There is a wrong way to do the right thing.

imported post

Michigander wrote:

But I can't see anything in the article which contradicts the law.

Click to expand...

This may be naive, but I don't see how running from the cops = RAS. Does it? For what crime?

imported post

CoonDog wrote:

Michigander wrote:

But I can't see anything in the article which contradicts the law.

Click to expand...

This may be naive, but I don't see how running from the cops = RAS. Does it? For what crime?

Click to expand...

The crime does not need to be specific...just "criminality" in general.

Running from the police is NOT smart... and can provide RAS.

see Illinois v. Wardlow, 120 S.Ct. 673 (2000)

http://www.aele.org/hot8.html