Pace
Regular Member
imported post
I removed my comment because I dont think racist remarks deserve any reply. They say it all.
I removed my comment because I dont think racist remarks deserve any reply. They say it all.
Saying "spic" is racist against Mexicans as a category of people. But the term "wet back" is not by itself racist. It is used that way most often, but in this context, I take it merely as a rude way to describe illegal immigrants, who I am the first to agree are a very serious problem, particularly along the southern border.I removed my comment because I dont think racist remarks deserve any reply. They say it all.
I'm sorry, it does not take a swat team to arrest a porn ring. Also, the use of swat teams has reached far beyond what they should be used for.What is the solution then when dangerous felons w/illegal guns have to be arrested? I don't disagree SWAT is overused, but there *is* organized crime in this country, including kiddie porn rings run by albanian, russian and other mob who carry guns. Just let them keep on kidnapping kids, setting up porn rings... come on.
Pace wrote:I actually do have a problem with swat teams---any time we seek to militarize law enforcement--it is a terrible idea.I don't have a problem with swat team,s I do have a problem that judges pretty much give warrants for anything. Breaking down a door, pulling someone out of bed should be pretty much reserved for almost no one.
Best,
PAce
that is one of the biggest problems i have noticed within the last couple years in this country. LE has WAY to much power. its, "lets send the military over seas so they can not do their job because all the UN and NATO rules" than, "we dont actually want to arm military personnel in america because they are a threat to homeland security"Law enforcement should not be militarized for any purpose. Militarization is the business of the Active duty, national guard and the state militias which fall under the authority of the national guard. If the police want to act like the army--join the army. If they want to be police--be police, but don't mix the two.
lol, you've already been banned. What else need I say? Cry some more?marshaul wrote:
Pistol-Packing-Preacher-in-PV wrote:
Sounds about right.Sonora Rebel wrote:MCSO, right? Scions of the single most corrupt individual in all of Arizona Law Enforcement.Where are they hiring these guys from? That didn't sound at all like 'Zonie LEO's
Seems to be enough explanation to me.
Go on ahead and stay in slipper land, we got enough of you wanna be freedom fighters from kali anyway, Clean up your own state/city then come on down and see if you learned anything. AS for Joe, hes the only guy keeping the wets at bay, also giving the Feds lessons in enforcing illegal immigration.
+1suntzu wrote:Pace wrote:I actually do have a problem with swat teams---any time we seek to militarize law enforcement--it is a terrible idea.I don't have a problem with swat team,s I do have a problem that judges pretty much give warrants for anything. Breaking down a door, pulling someone out of bed should be pretty much reserved for almost no one.
Best,
PAce
I'm waiting for the SS lightning slashes on their armbands. SWAT is a beacon for every sociopath that entered the cops because his IQ was too low for the army--or Burger King. Of course the next step is historical:
"We must take the guns from the people to make the streets safe for the SS."
A. Hitler
I'm waiting for the SS lightning slashes on their armbands.
All well and good. RJ needs to get a reality check anyway. Having had several members of my family (and numerous friends) in AZ law enforcement at one time or another, I can say on fair authority that "Sheriff Joe" is quite corrupt (and his MCSO deputies know it -- trust me). That has absolutely nothing to do with his activities with illegals, etc.marshaul wrote:
Pistol-Packing-Preacher-in-PV wrote:
Sounds about right.Sonora Rebel wrote:MCSO, right? Scions of the single most corrupt individual in all of Arizona Law Enforcement.Where are they hiring these guys from? That didn't sound at all like 'Zonie LEO's
Seems to be enough explanation to me.
Go on ahead and stay in slipper land, we got enough of you wanna be freedom fighters from kali anyway, Clean up your own state/city then come on down and see if you learned anything. AS for Joe, hes the only guy keeping the wets at bay, also giving the Feds lessons in enforcing illegal immigration.
ADMIN NOTE: See the reference to "wets"? That is why the status under RJ's name says "Banned". We will NOT tolerate racist comments on OCDO!
Thinking about it, and knowing my warped sense of humor, I would have probably burst out laughing when one of the MCSO boys said "...open carry nutcases.", and responded with something like "and who's the one who runs around in camo and/or tactical gear playing soldier?"Meant to mention this last week, guess since I have a few hours while my x-wife rapes me financially in my divorce, I decided to mention this.
Last week went into subway here in N.Phoenix (I'm waaaay up here, near Anthem) and there are often Phoenix Police and Maricopa County deputies here, some actually know me.
I'm not sure what it was, but walked into Subway, open carrying, in my jeans and shirt. I think the entire Maricopa County Sheriffs Swat team had to be in there; two of the guys jumped out of their seat, one of the guy got pulled down by a guy with stripes (Corporal? not sure...) who told him to settle down.
The conversation while waiting in line was:
"I think I know that guy, he's on the job...."
"NAh, he's just one of those open carry nutcases..."
"Yeah, seeing a bunch more of them..."
"No, I know the guy, he's with Phoenix PD."
A waive to them, a smile worked just fine!
Pace
RJ wrote:All well and good. RJ needs to get a reality check anyway. Having had several members of my family (and numerous friends) in AZ law enforcement at one time or another, I can say on fair authority that "Sheriff Joe" is quite corrupt (and his MCSO deputies know it -- trust me). That has absolutely nothing to do with his activities with illegals, etc.marshaul wrote:
Pistol-Packing-Preacher-in-PV wrote:
Sounds about right.Sonora Rebel wrote:MCSO, right? Scions of the single most corrupt individual in all of Arizona Law Enforcement.Where are they hiring these guys from? That didn't sound at all like 'Zonie LEO's
Seems to be enough explanation to me.
Go on ahead and stay in slipper land, we got enough of you wanna be freedom fighters from kali anyway, Clean up your own state/city then come on down and see if you learned anything. AS for Joe, hes the only guy keeping the wets at bay, also giving the Feds lessons in enforcing illegal immigration.
ADMIN NOTE: See the reference to "wets"? That is why the status under RJ's name says "Banned". We will NOT tolerate racist comments on OCDO!
As for RJ's assumptions, I just have to laugh, since I'm a native N. Arizonan, and we take care of our own business up here very well. Actual law enforcement personnel involvement trends from non-existent to minimal.
Outside of that, RJ strikes me as someone who's ability does not probably back up their talk. YMMV.
That's been noted several times in magazine reviews. While I'm not a fan of Kimbers in general--I like and carry SIG GSR type 1911s, I do like that pistol.Gunslinger wrote:I'm waiting for the SS lightning slashes on their armbands.
How about the LAPD "Special Investigation Section"? Here's the Kimber 1911 custom made for them with their logo:
I agree that there are many good cops. But SWAT has become over the top, imo. Not in every case, of course, but too often for a free society. As I recall the Horst Wessel Lied, there is a line about " the streets are safe for the Storm Troopers (Sturmabteilangsmen, if my German hasn't failed me.)" It isn't that far to substitute SWAT.I have my own opinions, as a Libertarian about police and the use of force, the unnecessary use of Swat teams. I think most of the anger comes from the fact that yes, that the paramilitary aspect of the police is overused, and that I do agree.
Either way, I'm all for protesting swat, because content can breed dictators... so even if I disagree, I am all for going to a little the "other way" in order to keep things in line.
Please however, don't make this a COP bashing forum, because there are many, many amazing police officers that agree 100% with our cause.
Best,
Pace
RJ wrote:
lol, you've already been banned. What else need I say? Cry some more?marshaul wrote:
Pistol-Packing-Preacher-in-PV wrote:
Sounds about right.Sonora Rebel wrote:MCSO, right? Scions of the single most corrupt individual in all of Arizona Law Enforcement.Where are they hiring these guys from? That didn't sound at all like 'Zonie LEO's
Seems to be enough explanation to me.
Go on ahead and stay in slipper land, we got enough of you wanna be freedom fighters from kali anyway, Clean up your own state/city then come on down and see if you learned anything. AS for Joe, hes the only guy keeping the wets at bay, also giving the Feds lessons in enforcing illegal immigration.
America's most authoritarian sheriff
Sheriff Joe Arpaio, of Maricopa County, Arizona, likes to promote himself as America's "toughest" sheriff. If by tough, one means authoritarian, then that would be accurate. There are few sheriffs in the modern world with a similar contempt for the law and the constitution. Actually it is the law that he disrespects. The constitution is just completely off his radar entirely.
Because of the numerous complaints that Arpaio engages in racial profiling the Immigration thugs told Arpaio he was no longer allowed to act on their behalf. And when Immigration thinks you are in contempt of the law and the constitution that says a lot. To get around the ban Arpaio now uses the slightest excuse to stop anyone who looks too brown for liking. Then the individual, if suspected of being an undocumented immigrant is arrest for human trafficking. The law exists to criminalize individuals smuggling in undocumented workers. Arpaio argues that any such person has smuggled himself and is thus susceptible to his authority. The same logic, I would note, would justify the arrest of all individuals under the age of 18 for child molestation if they masturbate.
Recently one of Arpaio's underlings was in court when a suspect was being sentenced. He walks over to a table for the defense attorney and swipes a privileged document. His theft was caught on video. Officer Adam Stoddard pretends he has the right to steal documents from an attorney's desk in court by claiming that it had "suspicious words" on it. Of course, even if true, the only way to know that was to pull the paper from the pile and look at it in violation of the attorney's rights. And that would invalidate any information he gathered by the act.
The judge says the officer is in contempt of court. More importantly he has shown a contempt for the law and shouldn't be a police officer. Not so, says Sheriff Joe, with his usual contempt for law and justice. The judge told the officer he must make a public apology to the attorney for violating her rights and the privacy of her documents. I would have preferred legal charges.
Sheriff Joe went ballistic—he is the law as are his deputies and they need not follow the law. Arpaio started his counterattack by claiming that attorney has links with other attorneys who allegedly smuggled contraband to prisoners (whatever that means in Arpaioland). But having "links" is not the same thing as having committed a crime. This was just Arpaio trying to tarnish the reputation of someone who embarrassed him by catching his arrogant staff acting with the same contempt for the law that Arpaio exhibits.
King Arpaio has ordered his sheriff to refuse to apologize for his actions. Arpaio says: "My officer was doing his job, and I will not stand by allow him to be thrown to the wolves by the courts because they feel pressure from the media on this situation. I decide who holds press conferences and when they are held regarding this Sheriff's Office." Doing his job? Theft is now part of the job of the sheriff's department? (This is the same department that took a tank to delivery to arrest someone on a minor charge. They left the tank parked on a hill when it rolled backwards smashing into a car almost killing a woman and her child.)
If the officer doesn't apologize he is in contempt of court and can face jail time for it. Personally I think Arpaio ought to be sharing the cell with him. Dissect Arpaio's comment and you will see several distortions of the truth—usually called lies in moral circles. An apology for acting illegally is hardly "being thrown to the wolves." And the officer was caught at the time and held in contempt. The media didn't have time to put pressure on the judge. But Arpaio has never been concerned about facts.
One local attorney, Jason Lamm, said: "Never before has this community seen such a blatant violation of the attorney-client privilege." Arpaio's claim is that the sheriff was attempting "to protect the people inside the courtroom." From what? A piece of paper? Words? It's just more Arpaio bullshit.