Cops the TV show.

[krader]

In my college english class one of our assignments is to write an analysis of a television show or music video, or song etc. I am writing mine on the TV show Cops, which was the topic for a interesting pro-con discussion involving my professer and classmates, some of us like it some of us don't. Some felt it is a fairly good show and enjoy watching it for entertainment taking into cosideration that not everything seen goes on every night and where the episode was filmed etc. Others felt it targets certain racial groups etc and exploits them for the purpose of making a TV show that sends a very negative message to its viewers. I understand both sides as they have their points. What I am curiuos about is how the LE world veiws the show ? Is it veiwed positively among police officers or negatively? I already have my ideas pretty good to go for my paper, but am just wondering what all of you may think.


Krader

[This message has been edited by krader (edited 04-11-2000).]

[falcon2]

As a member of the NYPD,I view the T.V program cops as an easy way for officers to get into trouble. I can't count the number of times that I have seen members of these small law enforcement agencys that the cops show follows around stop people when they have absolutely no right to do so. Officers end up turning a small problem into a huge ordeal for the benefit of the cameras. T.V cameras also serve to incite the the civilians involved, and this can only lead to officers getting hurt. The most important thing that officers have to remember is that there's going to come a time when you get sued. It happens especially if you work in a busy area. That same video footage that was shot for the cops program that you and your co-workers laughed about will come back to haunt you in the courtroom. All it takes is one instance where you did'nt follow department procedure,and that same department that you thought would take care of you is not going to indemnify you from this civil action. In clearer terms your SCREWED and on your own!!!

[dfwu]

Hi! I disagree a little with Falcon2. He is right that its easy to get sued, and any videotape of the incident is of course going to be used as evidence. He's also right that sometimes it looks like cops pull people over for no reason and search them. But, search and seizure laws are different in different states. Some of what I have seen officers do on COPS in some states I could never get away with in Washington state. Our state constitution has a higher level of protection for citizens and therefore I wouldn't have the legal authority.
Many officers I work with criticize COPS and say how bad the officers are and how "I would never do something like that". While sometimes there are some outrageous mistakes made by the cops, I think most officers view themselves as being better and doing things differently than they actually do them. In other words, if someone was filming them, I think they would be surprised how much they looked like everyone else on COPS.
The one area I think COPS is beneficial is how it shows how stupid, violent, and just plain illogical some people (suspects) behave. Often I think the lay-person just can't believe it when an officer describes the crazy, threatening, unreasonable behavior of a suspect and explains why he had to use a certain level of force. Most people don't see anyone ever act that way. Cops see it much more often. The Diallo shooting in New York is an example. Most people are quoted as saying they just can't believe the cops thought he was pulling out a gun, or how does a wallet look like a gun,etc. I've had my gun on an 18 year old kid who was reported to have a gun and threatening people. His hands were out at his sides and I told him to turn around and put his hands on a wall. Instead, he dropped his weight (like a fighting stance) and very quickly reached his right hand behind his back into the top of his pants like he was grabbing a gun! I almost shot him right there, but didn't. It turns out he didn't have anything. Now, would a normal person believe that a suspect would purposely bait the police into possibly shooting them? It seems illogical, but it happens.
Finally, it isn't just small agencies that are shown on COPS, and mistakes made are not made just by small agencies.
Thanks

[RECON5]

I see the logic in both arguments. One at time though, and since we are all telling, my view is from Texas Law Enforcement.
I do agree with Falcon2 that the video tape will come back to haunt you. Our team considered the idea of taping our forced entry search warrants, until a prosecutor confirmed it could be brought in as evidence, and no matter how well it went someone could find something to gripe about(pure liabiltiy).

I do not agree that the show Cops simply shows how much we all look a like on camera. To the contrary I think it shows how some departments execute good solid tactics, and others are greatly lacking in the training department.

As for the which states go by which law, our standards are usually set by the case law, and would change with Supreme Court decisions. In your case dfwu, it sounds like as long as officers abide by the State Statutes they dont have to worry. The department policy and procedures are what get most departments around here civially, and as one attorney said "The more of them you have the easier it is to sue the department or beat them on an officer disciplinary action issue". Cops does show obvious differences in the deparment policies of those organizations featured on the show.

I think it should be used like "ya'll" said, to show what cops on the street really encounter. So the next time some guy thinks his neighborhood cop is telling fish stories about human nature he can watch cops, and see people really do act outrageous at times.

I think all bad guys should watch the show. I couldn't tell you the number of times we have made entry, and the tv show COPS is playing on the tube. Now how else can you keep that many badguys occuppied at one time, and blow there mind at the same time when you make entry?

[bd]

Hey Krader,

Falcon2 and RECON5 bring up good points about the video tape being used as evidence. Houston SWAT used to tape all ops a while back and lost a video tape for one controversial entry. That's the type of thing that can bite you hard, especially when you get some money seeking lawyer involved.

BD

[falcon2]

Officers tend to forget that were not invincible from injury and or civil actions. There is only one positive side to having a camera in your car that I can think of and that's during car stops. It can not only help you give a description of the car or suspect if you've been hurt,but it can also save you in court when allegations have been made by the motorist against you. This happens far to often and the NYPD just recognized this and started installing cameras in their highway patrol cars and selected precint cars. In terms of having the COPS programs cameras in your car I think the cons far outweigh the pros. If the oppurtunity ever presents itself where the COPS program wants to ride along with your department just remember one thing. It might be fun for that one night, but eight months down the road when you get that notification to appear in civil court because your getting sued, and your department isnt going to provide legal representation because you failed to follow department procedure concerning a minute point. Your going to call up the COPS program asking for assistance and their going to tell you that they have no obligation to help you. Remember guys you,your family,and your co-workers safety and well being comes first. Always remember that!!!!!

[1026]

I believe it's propaganda, designed to get people accustomed to the idea of goons raiding houses. I have yet to see a raid on one of these shows turn up truly dangerous people armed with the evil "assault weapons"; it's always some sap in his underwear or what James Carville refers to as "trailer park trash." Yes, they're criminals, but not those of the stripe we constantly hear about.

[Swat1]

Goons raiding houses!! Maybe you haven't seen it on COPS, which I could care less as the show is good training material for what not to do, But the last search warrant our team executed we found a fully automatic SKS, a sawed off shotgun, a .45 cal pistol within arms reach of the main suspect, an ounce of methamphetamine, and several stolen items including motorcycles and ATV's. We do what we have to do for our safety. Sometimes it's overkill, but better safe than sorry.

NO APOLOGIES, I go home every night!

[RECON5]

With all due respect (not that you showed any with the "Goones" comment)

SWAT Teams do what they do, the way they do it to keep people from getting hurt. If you saw raid where they caught the guy in his underwear, you ever think maybe they did thier job real well. The planning, preparation, the intelligence is all part of the operation. Most Teams would prefer to run a mission when its likely to catch the guy in his underwear, in bed sleeping if possible. You see it keeps the bad guys from doing something stupid...like picking a fight they won't win. It also keeps us from having to justify why we won to those who would call us "Goones".

SWAT1 or anyone else who does this job should not have to apologize. Remember 1*

[Joe Pike]

1* (one ass to risk)is rather a silly affectation, and certainly conflicts with the idea of "Protect and Serve". Can't say I shed any tears over drug dealers or convicted felons being raided, I understand mistakes like Diallo, (although the number of shots fired there is certainly evidence of mediocre training) and the Federal trial of Koon, Wind, etc in that case was a travesty of justice. But there is a growing arrogance and lack of profesional skill among LE officers, the Hollywood Bank Robbery, the Columbine incident, Ruby Ridge, Waco, etc. The idea of SWAT teams wearing cammies and trying to be commandoes is a bit disturbing. There are many good LE people; but the number of wannabe tough guys hiding behind their badges is certainly growing.

[Sierra 1]

Please explain how the North Hollywood bank robbery incident displayed a "lack of professional skills" by LAPD officers.

Sierra 1

[Joe Pike]

Well, I consider marksmanship to be a professional skill. I admit there are many in the field who would disagree with me on that, and I would never argue that it should be considered the primary skill of a policeman.

[benelli]

It's obvious Joe that you have never been in a gun battle with someone trying to kill you. Let alone two suspects in full body armor with fully automatic weapons. The suspects were killed and the cops were not. They must have done something right.

[Joe Pike]

Yeah, all my observations are based on watching Walker: Texas Ranger. The most admirable thing about the Hollywood episode is that there were no civilians killed, not that no cops were killed. Unless you are of the 1* persuasion. I think there was an element of luck involved, considering so many rounds were fired, the situation lasted so long, and the robbers did not use any bank patrons as shields. I don't mean to say that the police were totally incompetent by any means, and the task they faced was certainly a difficult one. My main point was that I think dealing with street trash and/or fearful civilians every day tends to foster a certain amount of contempt in LE, a definite superiority complex towards the criminals (justifiably) and people they are sworn to protect (regrettably, this is also justifiable, in some cases). Then when the officers run into someone who has a little more firepower (even if they are incapable of employing it effectively, like in Hollywood) or skill/motivation, like Michael Platt, they come up short. Hollywood did have a happy ending, (unless the lawsuit by the family of the goof that bled out goes anywhere), and though there was a certain element of luck involved, the officers do deserve credit for their actions. It certainly isn't an episode to be lumped in with Waco and Ruby Ridge, I agree.

[RECON5]

Joe Pike - I have no idea who you are or your credentials, and would like to keep this forum from turning into a place to hold our personal pissing contest. Due to the fact I posted the 1*, I do feel obligated to atleast respond.

I have no idea where received your information or ideas on interpretting 1*, but let me tell you mine. It fits in line with your post on the mentality of LE. One ass to risk, being your own, is a reminder. Dont get over confident, take anything for granted, or ignore an opportunity improve yourself because "You only have one ass to risk, and it's yours". Now while I believe that your post is made up of your own personal opinions, which we are all entitled to, I also believe that if you want to post inflamatory remarks you might want to make it in the form of a question, or at least indicate you have some experience to back it up instead of disrespecting a group of people who are dedicated to protecting you and your family.

In an effort to keep with Sierra 1's professionlism on this forum, I will leave it at that.

REMEMBER 1*

[Joe Pike]

I don't think I made any particularly inflammatory comments. I am not a big fan of Monday-morning quarterbacking, but I don't think discussing actual events is unprofessional, nor is providing them as examples of points I make. I will try to use the question format, though, in the interests of avoiding pointless arguments.

Do you feel that the Hollywood incident could have been ended much sooner, once there were 13 cops or so confronting the two robbers? The bad guys had body armor, but it was certainly not completely invincible to pistol fire, and they stood around in the open talking, changing magazines, loading/unloading weapons and money from one vehicle to another, virtually ignoring the police at times. They were unable to effectively employ their weapons, considering that they fired so many rounds without killing a single person, their bulky armor prevented getting a good sight picture and restricted their movement, and they showed almost no evidence of tactical prowess.

"Semper Fi" implies a sense of loyalty above all else; I will never leave a comrade behind, I will never betray my country, and if it costs my life, so be it. Does "1*" imply that my ass is more valuable than the lives of the citizens I am sworn to serve and protect? Does getting tattoos, wearing cammies and special patches, (especially 1*) give the impression that some officers are more interested in looking cool/being more like the Army than in protecting and serving?

Is the increased militarization of the police forces of the US (fully automatic weapons, APC's, cross-training with actual military units, cammies) necessary? Does it have any significant disadvantages? Can it foster a mindset closer to "locate and destroy" rather than "protect and serve"?

Does the sense of power and control developed over the course of an officer's career lead to a sense of overconfidence? Once an officer encounters a situation in which the individual is outside his normal experience (Hollywood, Platt and Matix) does this overconfidence evaporate, and leave the officer even more timid and reluctant to engage the criminal than if he had not developed a prior sense of invulnerability? (Mireles credited his USMC training as the reason for his success against Platt and Matix, not his FBI training, so perhaps the militarization of police forces is justifiable?)

Do you feel there is a growing number of wannabe tough guys, people with chips on their shoulders, in LE?

I understand the "be careful out there" ethos of 1* and it is certainly good to remind your people they are not invincible, and not to take foolish chances. The patches/ball caps are more what I object to; nothing wrong with using it as signature on the internet. Hope this keeps things less confrontational and focused more on the subject. Thanks for the tip about "question format".

[pn]

Amen Joe.

The problem with wanting to kill all the bad guys is that everyone starts to look like one after a little while.

-pn

[jcollettusa]

I do not think training our LE with military units is a problem. Our LE agencies need all the training they can acquire, because they are the ones risking their lives. They go into situations, sometimes alone, and they have to be confident in their abilities or they will not be able to do their job, they will not be able to protect innocent civilians. I also don't think extra training will necessarily give them the "military mind set" of close width and destroy the enemy. I think that comes from a certain mentality that is layed upon military units.
Being trained in CQB and other military aspects does not necessarily mean you inherit the military mindset.

Yes, there does need to be a difference between the mentality of an LE officer and that of a grunt, but having any advantage over your rivals would most of the time prevent the use of deadly force rather than increase it. If I am confident in my abilities with hand-to-hand, I will be less likely to feel threatened, therefore, I would be less likely to rely on the next level of force (PR-24 or pistol).

I am not trying to rain on your parade, because you do bring up some very good questions that need to be addressed. I do agree with you that there is a problem, not with all, because 90% of the officers in this country is doing one hell of a job, but there is always that damn 10%. As for the FBI agent, I do not know the situation that happened with him, but USMC training is a lot more than just learning to be aggressive, I think it is the "discipline" that comes with it that is the most important aspect. Learning how to control your anger and hostility when put in a confrontational postion.

------------------
Semper Fi

[RECON5]

As for the gunfight in Hollywood, I will keep with your previous post, and not comment for the dislike of Monday Morning Quarter backs, and can only conclude that you have never been in a shooting incident.
I will say that it is my OPINION there are a greater number of LE personnel who suffer from a sense of complacincy than there are those who have a "superiority" complex.

I dont know of any operators who would make the sacrifices, display the dedication, or follow the strict discipline required to do the job just to wear "cammy's", and get tatoo's. If you question someone's rational for getting the tattoo, or wearing the ball cap....Go ask them. Like you said they are not superior to the citizens they protect. You might be surprised at the attitude, and the answers you'll get. Most of those who join the Military and LE Careers for this purpose are quickly enlightened, and discouraged from this path in the pursuit of Glory.

The 90% of us that jcolletausa mentioned do not do this job for the money nor the recognition. That should tell you something about our priorities in dealing with the citizens we are sworn to protect.

I hope this helps, if not you are in the right place to find multiple, and a wide variety of qualified individuals to respond.
bd jump in here anytime

REMEMBER 1*

[This message has been edited by RECON5 (edited 05-07-2000).]

[bd]

Ok. I thought I'd go ahead and weigh in. Since most posts have addressed the tactical aspects of LE, that's what I'll follow on.

jcollettusa and RECON5 are right on the money...CQB training does not automatically turn someone into an agressive killer. While marksmanship is an LE skill, it should not be considered the primary skill as Joe mentions. Good people skills outweigh shooting skills in the LE community.

In regards to the Hollywood shootout, I'm not going to play monday morning quarterback with that, and neither should anyone else for that matter. Until you're in a firefight, you can't make judgement calls about how "they shoulda done this or that".

Let's go ahead and clear the air here about LE and CQB...it's not all about killing. It's about *operating* tactically. (and comments about wanting to kill the bad guys are totally out of line and irresponsible) As far as training with military units goes, cross training is good for both. Mil units can learn from LE just like LE learns form the mil side.

About the need for SWAT. Tactical units are needed for the reason that the criminals are better armed and organized than ever. SWAT isn't about dressing up in "cammies" and playing war. The dress, weaponry, and tactics are designed to intimidate (among other things such as protect the operator). When a team raids a house, there is a shock value in that. You can argue that that shock may last only a couple of seconds, but that's enough time to take control of the situation tactically. In fact, many operations SWAT is used for don't involve a tactical gear-up at all.

Lastly, the militarization issue. SWAT is sensationalized in the media because that's what gets ratings. What TV and the movies portray isn't real. Bottom line...LE enforces the LAW, military enforces POLICY.

I'm not trying to be confrontational here, only conveying information. Sorry for the book.

Take care and be safe.

BD

[reconsweden]

I agree with bd, LE and Mil units can learn a lot from eachother, especially now that many mil units are doing peacekeeping duty.
About CQB, the purpose of it is to learn how handle any situation that you might encounter while solving the task you have been assigned. Mil units and LE have different tasks and different gear/weapons to solve their tasks but they can still learn a lot from eachoter, especially since the mil units devote a lot of time perfecting their CQB skills while the LE spend a lot of time in "the field" and have less time learning valubale lessons that the mil units have already found a solution for.
So, more cross training.
Keep in mind that I am from Sweden and have not the insight of those in the US.


------------------
Videre Non Videri

[jcollettusa]

I agree 100% with BD, the reason for CQB is not just learning the techniques, but it is the "SHOCK" factor that is paramount. When an entry team bust down the door and four men come in wearing all black with helmets, goggles, tactical vests, etc. it will scare the crap out of someone; and this fear that they put in the perp will give them a chance to make the arrest without a shot being fired. And believe it or not, this is the what the team leader wants; to avoid any shots being fired, and make a clean arrest with no injuries. It makes less work for the team leader and it also makes the team look more effecient, and it is also how they are trained. For example, if you look at the picture of Elian photo, the operator's finger is straight along the trigger well, that is how he was trained, it is another safety mechanism to keep operators from firing prematurely.

------------------
Semper Fi

[Sierra 1]

Joe Pike- (great books by the way)

As a matter of fact, the suspects in the North Hollywood bank robbery caper were wearing multiple layers of body armor that was completely impervious to 9mm handgun fire. They were armored on their arms and legs as well. Matsearanu (sp) was finally brought down by .223 rounds employed by SWAT officers that the officers bounced off the ground into the more lightly armored legs of the susp.

I agree that marksmanship is one of the more important if less frequently used skills of police officers. However, marksmanship was not an issue in North Hollywood. The suspects were hit multiple times by officers, but the rounds did not penetrate the suspects body armor. The only thing we could have done to end it sooner was possibly a head shot (which believe me was attempted) but you are dealing with distances of up to 50 yards. If you can hit a moving head at 50 yards while the body underneath that head is firing full auto 7.62 rounds at you, then Ill ride with you any day. Also, the suspects were wearing kevlar helmets. A direct hit still might have done the job, but with the reduced energy of the round after a long flight and the likelyhood of an indirect or glancing strike, it stll might not have helped.

The bottom line is we won that day. Were our tactics perfect? No but they worked. We contained the threat and ultimately ended the situation. Was our marksmanship perfect? No, but not only would it have made little difference but all things considered, it was pretty damn good. LAPD's "hit" ratio is much higher than the national police average, and is indicative not only of the LAPD's dedication to marksmanship but how difficult it is to hit someone who is shooting back at you. Compare are hit ratio (about 40%) with the average of grunts in Vietnam (20000 to 1) and youll see that we dont do too bad. Were we lucky that no civilians or police officers lost their lives? Absolutely. I think however that the husbands/wives, sons/daughters of the police officers there that day would disagree with you on your implication that the citizens lives were more important than those of the officers.

Ill also agree with you that the susps could have killed a lot of people if they had properly employed their weapons. It definately would have sucked if they had been a Marine Corps fire team rather than a couple of rambos with a lot of range time. Remember however their goal was not to kill people but to escape. They did a pretty good job of providing enough wounded to distract responding personell, and laid down enough supressive fire to keep everybodys heads down. Remember too that 1 dead is -1, 1 wounded is -1 plus all other personell that have to attend to the victim.

The bottom line here is you are Monday morning quarterbacking and frankly, unless you state otherwise, you are doing it from a position of ignorance. You are not a cop and have never faced the unique situations required of law enforcement. We Monday morning quarterback ourselves after every incident, be it a traffic stop or a shootout. Help really isnt needed from other quarters.

All the paintballs, simunitions, blanks and BB's (ouch! Remember MOUT Instructor Course? I still sting!) are just not the same as the real thing. Police officers carry live bullets every day. Every time you go out into the field its the real thing. Until you have been there, I suggest you leave the Monday morning quarterbacking to the quarterbacks.

In re the militarization of police work and SWAT policing I can only add that The SWAT officers on my department are in my opinion the best tactical operators in the world and are the farthest thing from Rambos. I think the problem arises in that you have every podunk department in the world with a SWAT team, and they just dont have a large enough qualified pool of officers to draw from or enough work suited for SWAT operations. You do end up with a group of individuals unsuited for the job of tactical operations, and you have them fully geared up with flashbangs and MP5's serving minor warrants just to justify their own existence. I believe these smaller agencis should use the assets of the county sheriffs, state law enforcement or by contract with larger agencies to satisfy their tactical needs. However tactical and CQB training is a must for the law enforcement community to meet with the increasing incidences that require an immediate tactical response. Think Columbine. This training must be and usually is tailored to the specific law enforcement, as opposed to military, mission.

pn- please see my comments directed to you on the LAPD string.

PS to Joe Pike- If I am wrong about my assesment of your experience please let me know. I believe in an earlier post Recon5 asked in a subtle way for your bona fides but you did not reply. This is not in any way a "mine is bigger than yours" contest. I just think its valuable to know the life experience of the people you are talking too. Also, there are a lot of posers out there and it is good to know who they are too.

Be safe, Semper Fi
Sierra 1

[This message has been edited by Sierra 1 (edited 05-09-2000).]

[Joe Pike]

Well, the question thing seems to have done the trick. Thanks again. I looked at some of the other threads on here to get a better idea of what the nature of the discussions was like (I know, should have done my recon first) I understand a little better why the response was a little heated. As far as posers, I agree that it is certainly easy to claim to be anyone you want on the internet. I think the best way to judge a fellow on here is to read what he writes, and if he sounds as if he is full of crap, he most likely is. It is true that it is easier to understand where a man's coming from if you know something of his background though, so time to start posin'. I was involved in some shooting incidents, and I have been military for a good long while, (same branch as everyone else on here, judging from the number of "Semper Fi's" I see). Got in some part-time work with DC Dept of Corrections, made me appreciate the criminals ever so much more (You guys might not have noticed, but almost all those convicts are actually innocent. I'm surprised they never explained it to you). I guess the 1* thing was sort of a trigger for me; I did in fact ask about that one time, (that's how I knew what it was) and got a pretty snotty reply. It was at a police shooting match open to the public, where the cops were doing some pretty poor shooting, along with giving some pretty bad attitude to people who were basically there to support them. I know, I know, can't judge a group by the actions of a few, but damn if it don't seem to be more common every day, almost. Damn younger generation. When I'm in uniform or giving classes to LE, they are a swell bunch of guys, but I've seen some pretty rude behavior toward civilians. (Marines of course, are always unfailingly gallant, civil and gentlemanly in behavior, especially after drinking.) That's partly why I didn't want to give much background info as well, I was kind of curious to see how you would treat just a regular guy showing up on your board asking questions. Guess I could have worded things more neutrally, but the damn Corps never did teach me any people skills. Pretty interesting review of the Hollywood case, thanks for taking the time. Got some well-read fellows on here as well, I'm glad to see. Take it easy.

[bd]

Joe,

I don't think anyone who frequents this particular forum is going to have a bad attitude with you for asking questions or even having your own opinions. Nobody here is looking for a confrontation and I've yet to see a pissing contest on the SWATNET forum. Things are generally pretty civil and I think you can tell who knows what by their posts on the forum. A lot of people come here because they have questions and I (along with others) always try to be helpful. As far as posers go, look at who posts what...that will tell you who the real operators are.

Now, all that being said...welcome to the forum. Always glad to see a new face.

Take care and be safe.

BD

[RECON5]

Joe Pike -

I can empathize with experiences with some LE personnel's attitude tword civilians, and having a family member in corrections, I have heard they sometimes get it worse than civilians.

Your post let on more than "just a regular guy" asking questions, and like Sierra 1 said we have a lot of posers. There are alot of experienced people that post on this forum, who will be glad to answer any questions you may have.

With 11 years LE Experience, and 5 of that being Tactical; I have answered many questions similar to yours about the 1*, and fatigues. I think you will find if you ask the questions in a "nuetral" manner you will get the response you are looking for. If you have an "opinion", and want clarification post it like that by all means. There are plenty of people with various experiences that can give you thier take on a topic.

Like bd said, this has been a clean forum without the pissing contest, and now that we are all aquainted....welcome.


REMEMBER 1*

[Sierra 1]

Joe Pike-

I dont know if its the kids these days or us older guys. Im certainly no old salt but Ive been around the Marine Corps and law enforcement (both corrections and police work) for a few years now. As I move into my mid 30's I find that all the kids coming up are snotty, the training isnt what it used to be and the standards have dropped...just the same things the old farts used to say when I was coming up. Not that there arent issues that need to be addressed, but I think young cops (and certainly young Marines) are and always will be in possesion of more balls than brains.

As for weapons skills and professionalism, these things vary widely from department to department and unit to unit (no different than the Corps). I think if your training experience had been with LAPD's SWAT or SIS for example, your impression would have been much different. I think our shooting teams have won just about every law enforcement/military shooting comp that they have entered since the time of black powder (except of course for all Sniper comps, which are always won by Marine Corps Snipers. Semper!). Having said that however, I just did monthly requal last week and saw another officer (I wont note the gender) who literally could not get one round in the black on 6 tries from 7 yards! That officer is probably out there working the streets today. Scary thought.

Any way, welcome aboard and your comments are always welcomed here.

Be Safe, Semper Fi
Sierra 1

[PathfinderJr3325]

With respect;

I note with dismay that one of the LAPD officers injured in the Hollywood shooting is suing the manufacturer of the weapon used to injure him. Why? Why not follow the lead of the boo-boo who bled out's family and sue his estate?

[Sierra 1]

I couldnt agree with you more. It is something of an embarrassment that this cop would do what he's doing. I feel bad disparaging a guy who took a bullet in the line of duty and will now be disabled for life, but the suit does seem frivolous and grates against my personal philosophy in regards to civil litigation. I never met the guy but I saw him interviewed and he came off as disingenious ("my life flashed before my eyes....") and not terribly bright.

Really, this type of suit is not just an indictment of the person bringing the litigation, but of a judiciary that gives it credence. Everybody knows, if you sue deep pockets, you are going to make some money in a settlement, regardless of the merits of the case. The City of Los Angeles, in its short sightedness, will settle almost any lawsuit made against it to avoid "the higher cost of litigation".

A few months ago, some scum won a 3 mil settlement from the city when he sued because he was shot by the police and paralyzed. It didnt seem to matter that he came after the officer with a knife, the shooting was ruled in policy and he was convicted of ADW on a PO. Its the LAPD lottery...better than the state lottery because you are almost guaranteed of winning. All you have to do is force a confrontation with the police, take your tune up, and collect big money in the settlement. If the city would fight all of these cases, then you wouldnt have these attorneys taking cases pro-bono just because they no they are going to score in a settlement. No free attorneys means less suits brought means ultimately less loss for the city. Dont ask me though, Im just a cop.

And then there are the scumbag civil rights attorneys (Yagman) who take weak cases to federal court, convince the juries to make a statement verdict (basically ruling the city at fault but awarding no monetary reward to the plaintiff because he was a scum and deserved what he got anyway), get no money for his client but still collect huge fees from the defendant because, in federal court, if the plaintiff wins the attorney is guaranteed his fees. ARRRRGH!

Whew, I better go now before I shoot my computer.

Be Safe, Sierra 1

[soup82]

Before I left the army, I worked JTF, based in El Paso and ran a first aid course for LE and NG, based out of the Lovington, NM Police Dept. After reading the previous posts on training and looking at the increasing number of peace enforcement missions ongoing, I think the flow might be reversing, i.e., LE can provide some mission critical skills to the military units tasked with these missions in Kosovo, Bosnia, etc.

Anyone who has been on these missions have any comments?

Patrick LaRocque

[maniac]

I think the show is crazy. I have seen so many violations of civil rights that it's silly. I once saw on "Cops", some police officer grab a person by the throat and choke him because they saw him swallow something that "looked like drugs". I thought: what if a cop stopped me and I swallowed my gum? Would they choke me and force me to throw it up on suspicion alone? Or they see someone run into some woods (who knows who or why) so they send in the dog to attack that person. I thought America was free? Guess I was wrong. They always mention that the person is innocent until proven guilty after they have thrown him to the pavement, and hand-cuffed him with their knee on the back of his neck. What a bunch of fascist bastards.

[dsumner]

I can't speak on some things, so I'll go with what I know. I'm a corrections officer in an adult male institution, and also a member of a corrections tactical team. We are required to video tape just about everything we do for legal purposes.

I normally work in the receiving unit with parole vilolators, new intakes, and the disciple problems. I average betwwen 125-150 inmate in my building. The bulding is set up dormitory style. I work alone and unarmed on the floor with 1 officer watching over me and or master control monitoring me on camera.

I can honestly say that most of these guys are complete dirt bags and will spend most of there lives in prison. I have a child molester, a rapist, armed robbers, drug dealers, and all of the rest of the garbage.

I've searched inmate and found drugs, and other contraband ,and the first thing they startyelling is that it's a set up. I planted it on them.

The only thing that protected me was the fact I always make sure I have camera on me
or someone watching me conduct the search. We have recently been informed that due to the number of law suits, and court cases where evidence was thrown out, that we must have to officers preasent to conduct any type of search.

Also when our tactical team conducts shake downs of the institution we get a boat load of clainms against the state. they usually clainm we have vilated their rights (false), we damaged their property(sometimes true), or physical abused them (usually false - we do have some guys who will get carried away and they need to go, as they a re a liability).

As for why tactical teams use military tactics. Over 80% of our team is prior military and a lot are still in the reserves or guard. our uniformswere selected to intimidate the inmates (36 people on the team, and over 900 inmates), we use military drill for movement. There was a "disturbance" at another institution and when the team deployed into its riot formation a large number of inmates gave up immediately. When asked why they stated that once they saw how they moved together as a unit, the inmates new they had their act together.

As far a s the CQB training goes, if you are beging held hostage by an inmate who knows he's probably going to get a life sentance for his crimes who do you want to come get you a motivated and slilled team of operators our, or the first few warm bodes they could pull together?

The video camera has helped us during a number of situations. In 1994 there was a riot at one of our older facilities, during which a C/O was hit in the head with piece of concrete and had his skull factured. If the cameras were not on they probably would not found the inmate that did it.

Cmaeras have also helped eliminate some of hte idiots we have working for us. They had a supervisor kick an inmate in the crothch after he was completely restrained and it was cuaght on cmaera. After IA was the tape the supervisor was fired, and rightly so Idiots like him are going to get someone killed.

Sorry this is so long.

[RECON5]

Maniac -

Well, your screen name suits your post very well. You are obviously not in the law the enforcement field, and have never done the job, but I would bet money you enjoy the rights and security the ones you speak so rudely about provide on a daily basis.

Before you make an opinion of an entire group of professionals, you should consider information provided in your own post. You have never been treated this way....That is what you implied by your questions. Could that be because you have never given the law enforcement in your town a reason to "throw you on the pavement" or "choke you" for swallowing gum. It is television, which means it is obviously edited to only reveal the most entertaining portions of the program, and leave alot of what may in fact justify the actions taken by some officers open for interpretation.

I would not attempt to justify every thing you may have seen on the show, but I would not "Monday Morning Quarterback" these officers actions either. With law enforcement, is as with any other job, There are those, who are completely dedicated the honesty, and integrity of thier work. There are also those, who will take advantage of any opportunity. Unfortunatley the later are the only ones highlighted by the media, and noted by critics like yourself. If you have a question about something specific you have seen post it, I am sure there is a law enforcement officer from that area on this board, who will be glad to calm an reservations you may have about civil rights by responding. Otherwise, I would suggest you take a look, at the criminal law in each of our states, compare it with Supreme Court decisions, and then make your decisions. Take all this into account, while getting the actuall, full story of what happend directly from the officers you observed, and then and only then would suggest posting an "opinion" about what you saw on that show. "Facist Bastards" is a very strong term to draw from a T.V. show. Your giving away your maturity level, which indicates you probably have a better chance at ending up "on the pavement" as opposed to getting a job with an agency and finding out the real facts of the job.

Remember it's entertainment....

REMEMBER 1*

[maniac]

Recon5...I suppose you are right about the editing of the film for "the most entertaining" parts. And I think some of the cops on the show really play it up for the camera. I apologize for implying all cops are fascist bastards (although some are). Please don't insult me by implying my maturity level is low. I have been on the receiving end of police brutality (extreme and unjustified the court ruled), and maybe that has colored my opinion of cops. Still, I am entitled to my opinions, and just because you disagree does'nt mean I am stupid, immature, or wrong. I believe power corrupts and very few cops can resist corruption. A cop projects at my place of work and he told me he certainly was not corrupt. I asked him if he gives his fellow officers speeding tickets? He just smiled and walked away.

[RECON5]

Maniac -

Ok...deal. I will not call you stupid, immature, or wrong based upon the content of your "opinions", and if you want to start a cop bashing articles I suggest you go somewhere else besides an LE Forum.

The only difference between what your doing here, on a post that has long since been dead, and picking a fight in a police dept locker room, is you know no one will strum your butt for inflamtory remarks made here with "assumed" anonymity.

I sincerely sympathize with you for any "police brutality" you have been the victim of, but if you honestly believe that all cops are corrupt, and make that determination based on a cop, who does not write other cops tickets....I think you are either severly sheltered or your revealing your maturity all by yourself.

REMEMBER 1*

[maniac]

Spoken like a true cop. Don't worry, I'm done with socnet so you will not get an ulcer over my opinions.

[jcollettusa]

good-bye.

------------------
Semper Fi

[Sharky]

And good fuckin riddance. You're just a wanna-be shit talker just like that other idiot strider. Talkin shit about something you don't know a damn thing about. I'll be glad when they ban your sorry ass off this board.

------------------
F.I.D.O.

[ski]

Well, this is my first post here and I would just like to tell Maniac 2 things. As a LEO for ten years I have...

1) given 90 times more non LEO civilians breaks on traffic violations than other cops. I guess I shouldn't give ANYONE a break, huh? Or would that make me a facist pig? Which way do you want it?

2) seen that the court may have said your recieving of "brutality" was wrong, but then again, judges have been wrong, too...

It amazes me how people can't tell or refuse to realize that COPS is a heavily editied piece of entertainment television programming. COPS approached the chief of my former department for permission to film and was given a polite "thanks for asking, but no." And for all those folks I see worrying about how the police are wearing black clothes and helmets and carrying sophisticated weaponry and equipment and that we are all being trained to be used as the UN's occupational force, blah, blah, blah...just take a look at all the names on the National Law Enforcement Memorial in D.C., names of men and women who gave their LIVES so you could live in peace AT HOME. How dare people say we have no right to make the situations we face daily as safe as we can. I dont want my name, or falcon2's, or dfwu's, or Recon5's, or Swat1's, or Sierra1's or any other name added to that damned wall. It is not our job to be hurt or die, despite contrary popular opinion. And for what it is worth, a bullet from a .38 revolver will hurt just as bad as a 9mm from an HK MP5. We got people on one side saying we don't need (deserve) SWAT type support and people on the other side (i.e. the Columbine families) saying we aren't aggressive enough. Oh yeah, please stop evil "racial profiling", but also keep the gangbangers in check, too. Police work is truly demanding, we are busy trying to be doctors, lawyers, marriage counselors, child psychologists, priests, search and rescue workers, deliverymen, traffic specialists, and a bunch of other "profressions" all at the same time, not to mention cathicng "criminals"...so don't expect all of us street officers to be expert marksmen also. I don't expect you to do a million types of jobs at the same time and I am not going to sue you if you put a band aid on too tight. It is just about darn near impossible to make everyone happy, and if people like Maniac think were in it for kicks, power, and money...boy are they ever wrong.

Stay safe, everyone.
Ski

[Sharky]

Great Post ski! Ditto for me. He just aint worth my time and effort to respond so eloquently. I have a vision of my hand sqeezing his skinny throat and his eyes are buggin out.........yeah.........

------------------
F.I.D.O.

[FLTCREW1]

Good string, I know I'm kinda out of my AO but I just couldn't help posting this message:

Maniac you worthless ass-munch, why don't you and your evil twin Stride-rite go bother someone else for a change.

NSDQ

[HmtPD2]

As a police officer, I think COPS shows you what NOT to do, ie. handcuffing people with your gun in your other hand, driving a pursuit into oncoming traffic, RUNNING up to cars when you could just as easily felony stop, shooting the tires out on a moving tractor trailer on an EMPTY freeway. just to name a few.

[HmtPD2]

As a police officer, I think COPS shows you what NOT to do, ie. handcuffing people with your gun in your other hand, driving a pursuit into oncoming traffic, RUNNING up to cars when you could just as easily felony stop, shooting the tires out on a moving tractor trailer on an EMPTY freeway. just to name a few.

[HmtPD2]

I know this is a little late, but I think I read somewhere that people want us (police) to take care of the problem, and put these rapists, drug addicts, and murderers in jail, they just dont want to see how its done.

[HmtPD2]

I know this is a little late, but I think I read somewhere that people want us (police) to take care of the problem, and put these rapists, drug addicts, and murderers in jail, they just dont want to see how its done.