LEO Tips for NC OC'ers

[Primus]

I am not bashing LEOs, never have. :lol::lol::lol:

Back pedal and avoid questions. Hence why I try to avoid you. At least other guys on here come right out and say they don't like LEOs. I respect them for that more then they probably believe. Its better then a guy like yourself who pretends he was once an Leo then takes every opportunity to make comments about leos in general or on this forum. When engaged you then go on rants about how you were the best Leo since sliced bread and how all the new generations basically suck.

I honestly thought it was just me you didn't like and that maybe I peed in your cheerios. This thread makes it glaringly apparent that you'll bash any Leo that reaches out on this forum. The op wasn't insulting. He was thoughtful and explained his background. He essentially threw out the olive branch for you. It was obvious to the other 3 or 4 guys that disagreed with him but did it respectfully and with tact. They even attempted to ask further questions. Or even better they disagreed completely and just left him alone without and bashes.

You merely road your donkey in here as the official " leave your badge at home your not wanted here unless you shut up and agree with a few of us" wagon.

Its honestly sad to see this guy is thinking about not coming back because of the actions of guys like yourself.

I apologize to anyone else who may be reading into this post and seeing it as negative towards yourself or this forum. It is not meant towards a slight towards any of you nor the forum. I enjoy your discussion and believe the forum is well run. You just can't avoid a "few bad apples".

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[WalkingWolf]

I don't like you, I thought you knew that by now. It has nothing to do with you pretending to be a LEO...

He was only criticized for his comments that have been long discussed here. Nobody insulted him or bashed him, or bashed LEO's.

You are full of yourself, and it seems you have problems with nobody kissing your backside. If by now you do not realize you are the source of your problems it is not my problem.

 

[WalkingWolf]

May I ask you a serious question?

How is it so many people with a gun and badge are so thin skinned?

It is not everybody with a badge, only certain ones, and there probably is a reason they are looking for acceptance and compliance on the internet.

 

[Primus]

I don't like you, I thought you knew that by now. It has nothing to do with you pretending to be a LEO...

Then it seems I'm doing something right in life

And again you try to back pedal and say its not about leos. Really so you dislike the op in this thread? In one post? Quick to make a judgement I guess. The only thing I can see about me and him is he tried throwing a bone out there and he's Leo. You responded with the SAME phrases to him. "Leave your badge at home" nonsense when he was trying to be decent.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

Typically "ask" implies volition whereas "tell" would denote a demand.

Y'know, not all of us fell off a turnip truck yesterday. What it may "imply" isn't necessarily what is being said.

Officer Friendly, "Sir, I'm going to ask you to step out of the car and place your hands behind your head."
Guy who just robbed a bank and still has orange smoke streaming from a bag in the back seat of his car, "Is that a request or an order?"
Officer Friendly, "I don't give a :cuss: flying :cuss: as long as you do it right :cuss: now."

 

[WalkingWolf]

Then it seems I'm doing something right in life

And again you try to back pedal and say its not about leos. Really so you dislike the op in this thread? In one post? Quick to make a judgement I guess. The only thing I can see about me and him is he tried throwing a bone out there and he's Leo. You responded with the SAME phrases to him. "Leave your badge at home" nonsense when he was trying to be decent.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

It is not about LEO's, because you have a hard time accepting that your arrogance breeds contempt is not my problem. And leave your badge at home was advice that all, or plumbing badge, or health inspector badge, or whatever it is, it means diddly here. If you are too slow to get that, again is not my problem.

 

[Fuller Malarkey]

Well, I'm obviously not welcome here. I'll take a hint. Maybe I was wrong to try not to be apprehensive of folks.

Help me understand this sentence. "Maybe I was wrong to try not to be apprehensive of folks". I have no clue what you are trying to say. I hope you work on your communication skills before you form the permission in your mind to kill people for "failure to comply". They may not be reacting in defiance. They may not understand what the hell you are saying.


For the record, I've been lurking here since 2010 when I joined, and this forum is the reason I started OC'ing back then. Went to a couple of meet ups too. Amazing how fast the community changes simply because I got a job with a badge.

I don't see having a badge as the issue here. Waving it around like a club will get you in the running with Primus for "most hated" here. I suspect by reading your posts it's more likely you'll qualify for the coveted "quickest to be kicked to the curb".

And please. Drop the obtuse act, m'k? "Aw kant understand why you folks don't love me. After all I was one of you once". IF you were here in '10, you know the biggest threat to rights an open carry person faced came from police. If you couldn't derive that from lurking here, I have to wonder how you came to be working in a field that should have some observation skill requirements.

 

[PALO]

Speaking of the "never talk to a cop" rubbish. Ironically, I just got subpoena'd for a case wherein a woman called claiming to be the victim of domestic violence assault. We arrived and spoke to both her and her partner and BECAUSE the suspect, the male spoke to us, and provided us reasons to discount her story vs. his, etc. SHE ended up getting arrested for DV Assault. I can still hear her screaming at me "you can't arrest ME. I CALLED police. You have to arrest him" and etc.

In brief, because WA state MANDATES arrest in many situations where there is (even if it's weak PC) PC to believe certain DV crimes occurred in the last 4 hours, if ONLY the woman complainan had spoken to us, it is quite likely the male would have been arrested. Her 'story' taken on it's own established PC. She obviously wouldn't point us towards evidence and/or witnesses that would refute or challenge her "STORY", and they werent' obvious EXCEPT for the suspect. BECAUSE he agreed to speak to us, even as the focus of an investigation, he ended up getting "victim" status and she got arrested and CHARGED.

As I have oft explained, MOST cases where it benefits one to talk to the police are the type where no court case ever comes about, because by speaking to the cops, in many cases the PC or RS is eroded etc. If one ONLY looks at court cases, it skews the perception since all those examples where talking helped by NOT getting the person charged, etc. don't exist in that set of examples.

fwiw, if the case had not been "domestic violence" related, NEITHER would have been arrested or charged. But since it was DV related, and there were injuries, etc. and it happened in the last 4 hours, an arrest was MANDATORY

fortunately, the (initial) "suspect" had the sense to tell his story and erode the case agaiinst him and bolster the case against her as the PRIMARY aggressor (in DV cases where we often have aggression/assault etc. on BOTH sides, we are mandated to arrest the "primary Agressor". The "victim" can still have some culpability, but whoever is "worse" so to speak is the one that gets arrested.

also, interestingly, the victim told me he had been arrested before for DV Assault with the same woman as a complainant but that she LIED and that's why he was arrested.

I asked him why he would stay with a partner who would lie to get him arrested, and it was because of the kids.

In this case, he decided that he was innocent and that it was in his best interests to let us know the why's and wherefore's and he ended up subtantially benefitting.

And as in many cases, if he hadn;'t spoken up at the scene, his statement would have less credibility given time to fabricate, and because over time some evidence erodes or does not come forward .

Just another example (i see several per week) where talking to the police, even if in the "suspect" camp, benefits oneself.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

But at least make an attempt to put this in perspective: when you approach someone you'd like to speak to, who is visibly armed, and are immediately greeted with hostility, it makes you wary as to that person's intentions. The inability to have a conversation is a severe hindrance to being sociable. I'll finish with this: I've never arrested anyone over a firearm (though I've arrested people for other crimes and it TURNED OUT they had a firearm... though those have a nice habit of being illegal firearms every time), and I've never approached an armed man with the intention of taking his firearm away. How I approach someone I want to speak to is entirely dependent on the circumstances of the encounter, and I see no reason to be impolite or discourteous unless I'm first given a reason.

The only thing that I would ask is that, in the same way that I determine how to approach or speak to someone based on circumstances, that someone show me the same decency in return.

No. Allow me to put it in perspective.
When I am minding my own business and approached by a man with a badge and a gun and immediately questioned as to my motives, my identity, my reason for being there, my ultimate destination, my home address and if that was where I came from, it makes me wary. The inability to be left alone absent some articulable, reasonable, suspicion of illegal conduct is a severe hindrance to my civil liberties and my right to be left alone.

The only reason you are approaching me is because I have a gun.
The only reason you are approaching me is because you have a badge and a gun. It's not Citizen Cane approaching me and asking what I'm doing with a gun; it's you.

Citizen Cane isn't trying to have a "conversation with me.
You aren't trying to have a "conversation" with me, you're trying to conduct a field interview and I'm not having it.

 

[Fuller Malarkey]

Again I try to engage you but sometimes I'm forced to when you speak senseless garbage.

Total nonsense and a total refusal for personal accountability. YOU CHOOSE to react. Nobody forces you to do anything. Own your behavior. It's tied in to earned respect, ya know.


"They know when they are off duty" doesn't answer my question. I've been engaging the 10 (maybe) guys that post on a regular basis. A few I'm aware of are retired. None have even alluded to being on the job. Even the moderators and some of those retired guys have stepped in to say tone done the Leo bashing. You seem to not get it I guess.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

I haven't seen much LEO bashing. You personally, on the other hand, might have a tough time starting a fan club here.

 

[PALO]

Thank you Falls, glad I was not the only one to catch that part of his post.

If it is voluntary, I PASS. There is no need for a law abiding citizen to unload their gun.

In 20+ yrs of police work, i have NEVER asked anybody to unload their gun. I cannot imagine a situations where i would. If the person is a felon who is carrying or whatever, then the gun is getting seized, and Ill unload it myself.

But if i am interacting with somebody, whether in a "social contact" manner (btw, the vast majority of a peace officer's time is other than enforcement of law related), a terry stop, a traffic stop whatever and they are lawfully armed, why would i do the unloading thing? and statistically speaking, ceteris paribus, I know the LAWFUL gun carrier is far LESS likely to assault/shoot/resist me than a non-gun carrier. That's just the facts.

There are rare, special circumstnaces where a person's gun is going to get (at least briefly) seized even if they are carrying lawfully. For example, if we are executing a dynamic search warrant at a residence, in many cases EVERYBODY present is detained, pat frisked, etc. UNTIL the scene has been made safe. 3 guys in my former unit (that did a lot of warrants) were shot on a warrant fwiw, so i do not act cautiously w/o good reason.

Again... good reason.

In almost every example of contact between me (a LEO) and an armed individual, there will not be any unloading or whatever.

 

[Primus]

No. Allow me to put it in perspective.
When I am minding my own business and approached by a man with a badge and a gun and immediately questioned as to my motives, my identity, my reason for being there, my ultimate destination, my home address and if that was where I came from, it makes me wary. The inability to be left alone absent some articulable, reasonable, suspicion of illegal conduct is a severe hindrance to my civil liberties and my right to be left alone.

The only reason you are approaching me is because I have a gun.
The only reason you are approaching me is because you have a badge and a gun. It's not Citizen Cane approaching me and asking what I'm doing with a gun; it's you.

Citizen Cane isn't trying to have a "conversation with me.
You aren't trying to have a "conversation" with me, you're trying to conduct a field interview and I'm not having it.

I would say the last part is untrue. The reason you would be stopped as he described is because another LAC would be calling about you. Your talking about officer initiated contact. He was clearly talking about a call for service. Big difference.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[WalkingWolf]

Speaking of the "never talk to a cop" rubbish. Ironically, I just got subpoena'd for a case wherein a woman called claiming to be the victim of domestic violence assault. We arrived and spoke to both her and her partner and BECAUSE the suspect, the male spoke to us, and provided us reasons to discount her story vs. his, etc. SHE ended up getting arrested for DV Assault. I can still hear her screaming at me "you can't arrest ME. I CALLED police. You have to arrest him" and etc.

In brief, because WA state MANDATES arrest in many situations where there is (even if it's weak PC) PC to believe certain DV crimes occurred in the last 4 hours, if ONLY the woman complainan had spoken to us, it is quite likely the male would have been arrested. Her 'story' taken on it's own established PC. She obviously wouldn't point us towards evidence and/or witnesses that would refute or challenge her "STORY", and they werent' obvious EXCEPT for the suspect. BECAUSE he agreed to speak to us, even as the focus of an investigation, he ended up getting "victim" status and she got arrested and CHARGED.

As I have oft explained, MOST cases where it benefits one to talk to the police are the type where no court case ever comes about, because by speaking to the cops, in many cases the PC or RS is eroded etc. If one ONLY looks at court cases, it skews the perception since all those examples where talking helped by NOT getting the person charged, etc. don't exist in that set of examples.

fwiw, if the case had not been "domestic violence" related, NEITHER would have been arrested or charged. But since it was DV related, and there were injuries, etc. and it happened in the last 4 hours, an arrest was MANDATORY

fortunately, the (initial) "suspect" had the sense to tell his story and erode the case agaiinst him and bolster the case against her as the PRIMARY aggressor (in DV cases where we often have aggression/assault etc. on BOTH sides, we are mandated to arrest the "primary Agressor". The "victim" can still have some culpability, but whoever is "worse" so to speak is the one that gets arrested.

also, interestingly, the victim told me he had been arrested before for DV Assault with the same woman as a complainant but that she LIED and that's why he was arrested.

I asked him why he would stay with a partner who would lie to get him arrested, and it was because of the kids.

In this case, he decided that he was innocent and that it was in his best interests to let us know the why's and wherefore's and he ended up subtantially benefitting.

And as in many cases, if he hadn;'t spoken up at the scene, his statement would have less credibility given time to fabricate, and because over time some evidence erodes or does not come forward .

Just another example (i see several per week) where talking to the police, even if in the "suspect" camp, benefits oneself.

YOU went on just HIS word to arrest her and not him... Sorry but that is funny I don't care who you are!

 

[WalkingWolf]

I would say the last part is untrue. The reason you would be stopped as he described is because another LAC would be calling about you. Your talking about officer initiated contact. He was clearly talking about a call for service. Big difference.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

A MWAG call is not a call for service, at the most it is a nuisance call. That would be the same as a man with a stethoscope call.

Legal activity, NO CRIME, no need to harass a law abiding citizen. Unless that particular officer is short with a tiny ~~~~.

 

[Fuller Malarkey]

Back pedal and avoid questions. Hence why I try to avoid you. At least other guys on here come right out and say they don't like LEOs. I respect them for that more then they probably believe. Its better then a guy like yourself who pretends he was once an Leo then takes every opportunity to make comments about leos in general or on this forum. When engaged you then go on rants about how you were the best Leo since sliced bread and how all the new generations basically suck.

I honestly thought it was just me you didn't like and that maybe I peed in your cheerios. This thread makes it glaringly apparent that you'll bash any Leo that reaches out on this forum. The op wasn't insulting. He was thoughtful and explained his background. He essentially threw out the olive branch for you.

Sorry slick, there is no mistaking the statist coaxing to forfeit rights, drop our guard to invasive attempt by government agents. It hit me the same way "just let the chimo play with your kid. I'm highly trained and know these things" does. Smarmy.


It was obvious to the other 3 or 4 guys that disagreed with him but did it respectfully and with tact. They even attempted to ask further questions. Or even better they disagreed completely and just left him alone without and bashes.

You merely road your donkey in here as the official " leave your badge at home your not wanted here unless you shut up and agree with a few of us" wagon.

"RODE". Not "road".


Its honestly sad to see this guy is thinking about not coming back because of the actions of guys like yourself.

I apologize to anyone else who may be reading into this post and seeing it as negative towards yourself or this forum. It is not meant towards a slight towards any of you nor the forum. I enjoy your discussion and believe the forum is well run. You just can't avoid a "few bad apples".

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

I read that bad apple thing to mean WW is "breaking blue", and you are retaliating by assassinating his character. An "ad hominem attack". WWe outwits you hands down, and rather than bow to your superior, you attempt to destroy a good mans character. This does not deviate from most of your methods, so not much surprise to those familiar with you. Just a word to the lurkers and noobs.

 

[Primus]

I read that bad apple thing to mean WW is "breaking blue", and you are retaliating by assassinating his character. An "ad hominem attack". WWe outwits you hands down, and rather than bow to your superior, you attempt to destroy a good mans character. This does not deviate from most of your methods, so not much surprise to those familiar with you. Just a word to the lurkers and noobs.

Your right he outwits me all the time by making short jokes and " little ~~~~`" jokes as he just stated above your post.

I'll bow down before his vast superiority and learn my place.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

We'd love to have you stay, and you're welcome to do so, BUT
That attitude that you can't be questioned just because you wear a badge just isn't going to cut it here; this isn't Officer.com or PoliceOne.com.

1. You have the right to remain a poster.

2. Anything you say can and will be used against you in the forum.

3. You have the right to express an opinion and to defend that opinion.

4. If you cannot show citations for your statements, you may freely be questioned or mocked by fellow forum members. You do not have the right to not have those opinions questioned by virtue of employment

5. You can decide at any time to exercise the option not to express an opinion or to answer any questions put to you. Forum members are free to draw what conclusions they may from such silence.

 

[Primus]

A MWAG call is not a call for service, at the most it is a nuisance call. That would be the same as a man with a stethoscope call.

Legal activity, NO CRIME, no need to harass a law abiding citizen. Unless that particular officer is short with a tiny ~~~~.

I read that bad apple thing to mean WW is "breaking blue", and you are retaliating by assassinating his character. An "ad hominem attack". WWe outwits you hands down, and rather than bow to your superior, you attempt to destroy a good mans character. This does not deviate from most of your methods, so not much surprise to those familiar with you. Just a word to the lurkers and noobs.

See I even put then together so they read smoother..... " officer is short with a tiny ******" and then you step right in his mess.... by trying to defend his intellect and character.

Good work brother.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[WalkingWolf]

See I even put then together so they read smoother..... " officer is short with a tiny ******" and then you step right in his mess.... by trying to defend his intellect and character.

Good work brother.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

I never mentioned you in that humor~~~ You seem overly sensitive...

 

[Fuller Malarkey]

See I even put then together so they read smoother..... " officer is short with a tiny ******" and then you step right in his mess.... by trying to defend his intellect and character.

Good work brother.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

More ad hominem attack. Kind of a one trick pony. That may be short and has a tiny ****, based on reactions.