Women In SWAT? [Archive] - SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network

Jeff Rambo

23 May 2001, 03:14

Just ran across a 5 minute piece on the local news that made me wonder ... How many of you out there have any female officers on the teams?

LASD SWAT has 3 Female Offiers (err Deputies).

Was interesting to see how female LASD Deputies were once required to wear skirts & high heels on duty, and carry their guns in bulky purses. Too bad they did away with that requirement http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

Watsy

23 May 2001, 06:56

The Law and Order March 2001 addresses this
issue...The best article I have ever seen...
Personally, I have applied three times and have never gotten past the To/From stage...
My Chief does not think women should be on
teams...I am not silly I do NOT want to be
on the ENTRY team...but there are a lot of
other things a gal can do...I do know the only team in my state that have women are the
Sherrif's departments which primarily do
corrections...I think it's a sad state of
affairs...I believe it's going to take some-
one getting sued to alter the "BOYS CLUB"
mentality...As a result I train, shoot and
try to stay as current as possible with NO
support from my people...I joined NTOA for that reason to learn...I would be interested
in hearing from women on the teams how long they have been on the teams...etc...

------------------
Take calculated risks.
That is quite different from being rash.
George S. Patton

RECON5

23 May 2001, 08:36

Rambo - The team I came from, and consequently just completed the last SWAT School with as Guest Instructor, has had two females on the team at different times, and one has now returned as thier Commander. The current Commander's sister had previously been the Commander, while I was a member. They have also had one female Sgt. Both of the female Commander's (sisters) have put alot of effort in to getting equipement and training. Example, they now have an armored vehicle they are decking out. Not that this was hard to aquire, but it was getting it approved that took the work. I think they will share the concensus that it is not male or female but the individual. I have seen sorry examples of Swat Officers/Supervisors in both gender's.

Watsy - come on down here, I am sure the guys will let you play on thier team.

------------------
REMEMBER 1*

benelli

23 May 2001, 11:32

We have one on our team currently and have had one other in the past. Like the other post said, there are bad operators of both gender. She got no special treatment in the testing or academy and did a lot better than alot of guys....

krader

23 May 2001, 11:44

Talked to a girl in one of my classes here at college yester and she said her mom at 41 years fo age is still an active member or on th ethe nearby sheriff department SWAT teams and has been for quite awhile know. Never met the women but i guess she is pretty small also.

mdb23

23 May 2001, 12:12

KCPD currently has a female on one of the Tac Teams. In the past, other females have been a part of Tac.

mdb23

23 May 2001, 18:08

In regard to what mdb23 wrote: On the KCPD, out of 36 officers in the Tac unit there are currently two females. I'm leaving the Tac Unit due to injuries received in a motorcycle accident, and will be replaced by a female, bringing the total to three.

Mark/MF

WBRCRT

24 May 2001, 00:33

In our requirments for becoming an operator we make no mention of sex other than (Y) or (N). We have one female on our team that holds the position of negotiator. I would put her skills or "gift of gab" against anyone male or female. She has no desire to be on the entry team but holds an obviously vital role in the teams success.

mdb23

24 May 2001, 03:49

MF

Sorry for the misinformation, I will try to get my sh*t straight before posting in the future.

I know that there is one female in TAC at Metro, but I am at a loss as to where the other is at. Is she in straight Tac or SNU Tac?

mdb23

MADMIK

24 May 2001, 13:07

The D.C. police used to have an all-female SWAT team. A guy at the SOD told me they were a joke.

grrlcop74

24 May 2001, 17:46

No present members on MPD's tac team, but I am unsure of past members. There are quite a few females on our other special operations units, the Jaguars and Rangers. Yes, <gasping> female Rangers LOL. Watsy, I wouldn't suggest to anyone to sue to get their way..A)Shannon Falkner, etc., etc..rocked the boat and then capsized. A good way to end a career; B)Even if you're qualified, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the other members, and you will still not be a member of the "boys club"; C)There are other concerns besides just being able to do a job on paper--if you don't mesh with the unit in more aesthetic ways, you won't fit in anyway, male or female. There's a guy here who's gungho, shoots, runs, fights with the best of them..but he's got an attitude problem and doesn't work well with others, and it's a known fact that as long as the power that be remain in charge, he won't EVER be on the team. D)It's just plain tacky, for lack of a better term. If you can't get it on your own merits, go somewhere where you will be appreciated.

What the hell you feeding those people up there that a town that small has to have a SWAT team? http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

Kristen

grrlcop74

24 May 2001, 17:52

Oh and Jeff, regarding the skirt comment...

A couple of years back we had a female deputy here who sued the department because it WOULDN'T let her wear a skirt. She wanted to wear one for religious reasons; the old sheriff told her she could wear a skirt (so she said--nothing on paper), and since she was assigned to desk duty, it was no big deal. The new sheriff came in and rotated her back out to patrol and told her she would wear the appropriate uniform for patrol, which was slacks. She balked and said it was all political, yada yada yada, and finally they made her and the sheriff sit down and design a compromise uniform, which was big ol' culottes. Talk about classy...didn't help that she was about 45 years old and looked like a hippo in heat.....

Kristen

grrlcop74

24 May 2001, 22:57

Originally posted by MADMIK:
The D.C. police used to have an all-female SWAT team. A guy at the SOD told me they were a joke.

I would REALLY like to know where you get your information.

Kristen

Gunpoint

25 May 2001, 21:43

There are no female operators on my SWAT Team, but San Francisco FBI has a former Stanford track star who is supposed to be shit hot.

HRT has had three females try out, and so far, none have made it.

jnc36rcpd

26 May 2001, 03:36

MADMIK, did your contact at SOD mention when the all-female SWAT team was operational? What was the rationale behind its creation? Was this a unit separate from ERT?

Granted, I work out in the suburbs, but MPDC ERT always seemed to be a multi-racial and sometimes co-ed team.

The Montgomery County PD ERT has had a female operator onthe decentralized element. There are also two female medics in the Tactical Support Unit.

[This message has been edited by jnc36rcpd (edited 05-26-2001).]

MADMIK

29 May 2001, 15:13

He said they were not really operational, but something like a training program or so. They used to train by the SOD facility near Union Station. The MPDC ERT was on strike a few years ago protesting on everything (training to weapons to clothes to...).

Originally posted by jnc36rcpd:
MADMIK, did your contact at SOD mention when the all-female SWAT team was operational? What was the rationale behind its creation? Was this a unit separate from ERT?

Granted, I work out in the suburbs, but MPDC ERT always seemed to be a multi-racial and sometimes co-ed team.

The Montgomery County PD ERT has had a female operator on the decentralized element. There are also two female medics in the Tactical Support Unit.

[This message has been edited by jnc36rcpd (edited 05-26-2001).]

Watsy

30 May 2001, 00:23

MadMik,
I have resisted commenting on your "Tone and
Spirit" in which you spoke about the all
female team as a "joke"...I know a lot of incompetent,unskilled male operators who because they are in the boys club succeed
by virtue of the fact they pat with the "FUR"
as a result they are on the team...If the standards were across the board, I doubt some of the "boys" could cut it...as I am sure some of the "gals" could not either...The most important skill we have on the street is our brain...I would love to read your resume...From your limited comments, I am sure I can surmise just what I would be dealing with at 0200 on a back road...
I hope I am wrong but I doubt it... http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

<<Now I feel better I have wanted to say that since your posted your comments>>

------------------
Take calculated risks.
That is quite different from being rash.
George S. Patton

grrlcop74

30 May 2001, 00:30

Ignore him, Watsy. He's a deaf librarian, in more ways than one. All of his info comes from reading, and he refuses to listen to the truth. Apparently since he can't be one of the club, he's going to get his kicks by irritating the shit out of those who can.

Kristen

jnc36rcpd

30 May 2001, 03:16

MADMIK, did your friend mention any reason why MPDC would organize an all-female SWAT team? More importantly, did they have have any T-shirts made up? Thanks and be safe.

Curtis Newkirk

30 May 2001, 03:36

Wasn't there a three personnel, all girl SWAT team back in the 70s. I think the program is coming back on line now.
They worked for this dude named Charlie, but never get to see him.

------------------
Nuck
"Defensor Brewus"
Defender of the beer

Skip

30 May 2001, 04:54

Most tactical teams here in the UK have girls on the teams. Some do not and are very sceptical. SO19 (= to LAPD SWAT) only passed it's first 2 last year and the girls were given a very hard time, but they got through.

It's also worth remembering that there are females on Delta, the Royal Marines have opened up their selection to women and so to have the SAS. 14 Inteligence has used women for a long time, very sucessfully.

Whilst the thought of women in an area of operational conflict will make many people balk, I'd say from my experience there are some women that can do the job better than some men.

Lets remember the likes of Juilet (Jewish herion), Joan of Arc, and many others. SOE during WWII had many women, and a lot of them got bloody. The British used women on many Eagle patrols in Northern Ireland.

Women are often better snipers and shots than blokes - this has been proven time and again.

Don't get me wrong, I am no feminist - all I am saying is that the entry requirements and selection process should be open to all, and judged evenly and without bias.

grrlcop74

30 May 2001, 07:02

It is obvious by his post that Skip is an extremely intelligent, mature, and insightful person.

So, Skip....you married? LOL

Kristen http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

Watsy

30 May 2001, 08:30

Recon,
Look out...blow on the ink is it dry yet...
if not go to plan B...Kristen is having those silly thoughts...

You're in trouble Recon...Seems she's in "LUST" with the englishman who's in touch with his femine side...

Actually, Kristen you bring up a very valid
point...is he single??? And how many frequent flier points do we get to go over to the UK???

------------------
Take calculated risks.
That is quite different from being rash.
George S. Patton

Skip

30 May 2001, 12:35

Actually dudes I got hitched a couple of weeks back. As for the rest *blush*

Skipoooooo

MADMIK

30 May 2001, 12:51

Almost 2/3 of the D.C. police force disciplined every year since 1992 were hired in 1989/1990 when the standards were lowered or non-existence, if you will.
What's your point, lowering standards to have more men in SWAT or raise the standards to have less female?
Mike

Originally posted by Watsy:
MadMik,
I have resisted commenting on your "Tone and
Spirit" in which you spoke about the all
female team as a "joke"...I know a lot of incompetent,unskilled male operators who because they are in the boys club succeed
by virtue of the fact they pat with the "FUR"
as a result they are on the team...If the standards were across the board, I doubt some of the "boys" could cut it...as I am sure some of the "gals" could not either...The most important skill we have on the street is our brain...I would love to read your resume...From your limited comments, I am sure I can surmise just what I would be dealing with at 0200 on a back road...
I hope I am wrong but I doubt it... http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

<<Now I feel better I have wanted to say that since your posted your comments>>

grrlcop74

30 May 2001, 15:02

Ah you're safe anyway, Skip. Internet lovin' is not my thing. It's so...desperate in a way I guess. I'm sitting at work right now at my airport job, and about an hour ago a flight came in and two internet lovers were united in reality at last...it was so damn funny. It happens occasionally and we always get a good laugh out of it. Well, until the ones that don't go so well come along, and we end up with one psycho flying into town to stalk somebody who was stupid enough to give out personal info such as address and phone number on the internet because they were in "love". Of course, then they get a cyber divorce because they talked to another screenname, which is apparently cyber adultery, and one party ends up going to pay a little visit. Freaks.

Sharky, stop calling me dammit.

Kristen

mtech_81

30 May 2001, 16:21

Curtis,

That three woman SWAT team was recently revived in fact. Apparently that Charlie guy (whoever he may be) got back in the business. From what I gather, they're quite competent.

Although I'd bet on the SWATNET Dynamic Duo (grrlcop & Watsy) vs. Charlie's Angels. http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

[This message has been edited by mtech_81 (edited 05-30-2001).]

RogueExec

30 May 2001, 18:17

Originally posted by MADMIK:
Almost 2/3 of the D.C. police force disciplined every year since 1992 were hired in 1989/1990 when the standards were lowered or non-existence, if you will.
What's your point, lowering standards to have more men in SWAT or raise the standards to have less female?
Mike

The point is, stats are ALWAYS skewed, usually in favor of the point of view of the bean-counting, no-street-experience-having, pocket-protector-wearing statistician. Kristen is right. Drop the books, test, get on with a department, THEN talk shit. Otherwise, get the hell out of the AO with your Monday Morning Quarterback BS.

Love and smooches,

ROGUE

[This message has been edited by RogueExec (edited 05-30-2001).]

RECON5

30 May 2001, 23:00

Watsy - No worries she is patronizing a fellow, who made a favorable post, but just in case your right I will send a fresh copy of "It's not personal that is why my Lawyer is screwing you"....formally known as a Decree. She will soon recall how love has nothing to do with it.

Now single was a relavent question, but was honestly answered, which will most likely add to her desire......

------------------
REMEMBER 1*

jnc36rcpd

31 May 2001, 04:37

MPDC undoubtedly lowered their standards for several recruit classes hired during the Marion Barry administration. The Washington Post made quite the issue of this in some sensationalist articles (though I don't recall them addressing the issue when the standards dropped).

What struck me about the Post expose was that the notorious recruit classes didn't do as badly as the Post implied. There were a lot of MPDC officers from those classes being disciplined, but the classes from those years made up a large proportion of active street duty cops, the ones who would more likely end up in jack-pots than more experienced officers in either patrol or specialized functions.

I maybe somewhat biased in this discusion. I was involved with an officer who was from one of these entry-level classes. She would go absolutely ballistic over the Post's constant references to these notorious recruit classes. Understandably so, for all the criticism of MPDC, a significant number of their people are hard-working and dedicated. They work in one of the tougher police environments in this nation.

By the way, which SOD facility are you referring to? The one on L street or Kelly's Irish Times? Be safe.

Watsy

31 May 2001, 08:49

Rogue,
I love when you put so much passion into your posts...

------------------
Take calculated risks.
That is quite different from being rash.
George S. Patton

RogueExec

31 May 2001, 12:10

THanks, Watsy..........glad to have provided a passionate moment for ya! http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/wink.gif

grrlcop74

31 May 2001, 14:05

Ah...Kellys...<wiping tear> the memories!! And don't worry, Recon...Skip's too far away anyway. I'm not traveling for ass when I can have my pick right here at home LOL.

Kristen

grrlcop74

31 May 2001, 14:18

And it seems as though InsaneMike has taken offense to my little deaf librarian post, and has seen fit to send me unsolicited emails..I will post them here for your viewing pleasure....

How would you know?

Do you know a Mobile cop who's married a deaf woman?
My wife and I went to their wedding. Want me to you
give his initial?
Regards,
Mike

And here is my reply

I could really give a rat's ass less. Now, I will politely ask the first time not to email me again.

Kristen

And here is what I received back from him

That's what I thought. An ex-cop who left under
certain circumstances, umm.

Not email you?? As long you stop insulting me, then I
will stop email. Simple. Or go ahead and get a court
restraining order. All the judge has to see is your
postings.

Mike

Of course, he has been blocked from my email addy now. But lets address some of his key points, shall we?

*"left under certain circumstances"...Oh really? And what would those circumstances have been? And from what department? And where did you get your information from? Be careful, Mikey...alot of the guys here have known my story from the get-go..let's see if what you manage to pull out of your ass matches up.

*"as long as you stop insulting me, that will stop the email"..And where have I lied, Mikey? Until you see fit to post the truth and stop being an ass, I will continue to point the inanities of your posts out. And since you're blocked now, the emails have stopped anyways http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/smile.gif.

*"All the judge has to see is your postings"..Hhmm...I really doubt the judge could give a rat's ass less about me exercising my First Amendment right to let everyone know you are a dumbass. Not that I think anyone really needs any help from me figuring that one out. How does it feel knowing NO ONE here likes you?

Your disability is NOT what's wrong with your ears, but rather what's wrong with what's between them. The quicker you stop feeling sorry for yourself, the quicker you will be able to move on with your life and do something productive with it.

Kristen

Watsy

31 May 2001, 14:34

The Winner is....................
Kristen...

<<When a women gets pissed off, they win...>>

------------------
Take calculated risks.
That is quite different from being rash.
George S. Patton

MADMIK

31 May 2001, 15:47

The fact you investigated my background is really suspicious. If you're using government databases, then you're abusing you work. Making threats without authorizations (especially a court order) is serious. The judge will know the difference between proper and misuse of the First Amendment. Justify the First Amendment to investigate someone is a very stupid reason.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by grrlcop74:
[B]And it seems as though InsaneMike has taken offense to my little deaf librarian post, and has seen fit to send me unsolicited emails..I will post them here for your viewing pleasure....

Of course, he has been blocked from my email addy now. But lets address some of his key points, shall we?

*"left under certain circumstances"...Oh really? And what would those circumstances have been? And from what department? And where did you get your information from? Be careful, Mikey...alot of the guys here have known my story from the get-go..let's see if what you manage to pull out of your ass matches up.

*"as long as you stop insulting me, that will stop the email"..And where have I lied, Mikey? Until you see fit to post the truth and stop being an ass, I will continue to point the inanities of your posts out. And since you're blocked now, the emails have stopped anyways http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/smile.gif.

*"All the judge has to see is your postings"..Hhmm...I really doubt the judge could give a rat's ass less about me exercising my First Amendment right to let everyone know you are a dumbass. Not that I think anyone really needs any help from me figuring that one out. How does it feel knowing NO ONE here likes you?

RogueExec

31 May 2001, 18:32

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RogueExec:
Drop the books, test, get on with a department, THEN talk shit. Otherwise, get the hell out of the AO with your Monday Morning Quarterback BS.

Love and smooches,

ROGUE

My original post stands. Don't go away Mad, Mik, just.........you know.

Watsy

31 May 2001, 19:46

I second Rogues motion good bye MadMik...

------------------
Take calculated risks.
That is quite different from being rash.
George S. Patton

mtech_81

31 May 2001, 19:50

Originally posted by RogueExec:
The point is, stats are ALWAYS skewed, usually in favor of the point of view of the bean-counting, no-street-experience-having, pocket-protector-wearing statistician.
[This message has been edited by RogueExec (edited 05-30-2001).]

You know, we used to have a saying about statisticians in grad school....

"Trusting a statistician is like trusting your cellmate with the information you have a tight ass. You're going to get screwed."

grrlcop74

31 May 2001, 20:46

LMAO!! Now I'm part of a government conspiracy...I think I managed to push a button, eh?

Kristen

Curtis Newkirk

31 May 2001, 21:52

I like MIKe. He makes me feel literate.
He's also about the easiest target on the range.

------------------
Nuck
"Defensor Brewus"
Defender of the beer

fish78

31 May 2001, 22:40

Kristen,
How did you know Mikey is deaf? I have no particular reason to want to know, other than I thought I was sagacious. How could I have missed that one?
Dazed, confused and apparantly just plain stupid.
Fish78

grrlcop74

31 May 2001, 23:25

InsaneMike is right, to an extent--a little birdie did tell me, but it wasn't a government little birdie nor was it in any way connected to law enforcement. I would really like to know what government database exists with medical records http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/rolleyes.gif. After hearing that, though, it started to come together...the posts that might be grammatically correct to an extent but don't SOUND right, the incessant reliance on book and not practical knowledge, and the bitterness that lurks in his soul for something beyond his control. Was he dealt a bad hand in life? Perhaps. Is it his fault? Is it our fault? No. But it doesn't excuse his behavior in these forums. The little birdie said he just wanted attention, even if it was negative, from BTDTs. I pointed out the countless numbers of people who come in here who haven't been there, haven't done that, and are accepted with open arms because of their attitude and outlook on life. Apparently he doesn't realize that he could be just as accepted, if only he changed his attitude and showed a little humility by admitting the limitations of his book knowledge when a BTDT points out his errors. As a disabled vet myself, he needs to realize the irony of the fact that the biggest disability he has is also the one he has the power to do something about--his attitude.

Kristen

Marauder

1 June 2001, 17:40

Originally posted by grrlcop:
As a disabled vet myself, he needs to realize the irony of the fact that the biggest disability he has is also the one he has the power to do something about--his attitude.

C'mon now Kristen, having the libido of ten normal women does not qualify as a disabilty. http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/tongue.gif

<Note: I mean no disrespect for anyone with a disability or any disabled veterans. I just think this post needs that old familiar SWATNET humour back. If I wanted serious discussion, I'd go to, say, HUMORNET or something. http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/smile.gif Love ya Kristen [in a strictly platonic, friendly, good-natured "please dear god put down the gun and nightstick!!!" kinda way. http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/wink.gif])>

grrlcop74

1 June 2001, 18:47

ROFL, Marauder!!! <wiping tear>

Kristen

RogueExec

2 June 2001, 02:34

Originally posted by mtech_81:
"Trusting a statistician is like trusting your cellmate with the information you have a tight ass. You're going to get screwed."

Just found me a new favorite quote. Thanks, dude. http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

DFC5343

2 June 2001, 20:49

Maddick...this is the deal. Stop posting your know it all bullshit. This is a all cop and some respectful others thread. Kristen has all the rights of the freedom of info act at her disposal as well as any other resouceful smart person. You act like someone who likes to dish it out and can't take it (kinda like most of the pussies I have to work with). If you think for one minute of going out for some kind of legal bullshit deal with anyone on the SOCNET board, think again. Don't be a dumbass. Know when to fold and get a new hand. Read some of your own shit. Alot of us here are resonable. We tolerate some of the craziest questions. You on the other hand spew feces out your pie hole and when someone challenges you, legal threats. My suggestion is as always. Never piss off the locals, sit back and learn the rules of the road. You may actually learn something.

Kristen...who loves ya baby! http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

Watsy

3 June 2001, 08:58

"One who knows when he can fight,and when he cannot fight,will be vitorious."
SUN-TZU

<<MadMik...Runnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn>>

------------------
Take calculated risks.
That is quite different from being rash.
George S. Patton

grrlcop74

3 June 2001, 18:02

You, DFC bay-bbbeeeee, you!!!! LOL

Kristen

mtech_81

3 June 2001, 19:49

From a truly underappreciated strategist of monumental proportions:

"You've got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away, know when to run.
You never count your money when you're sittin' at the table.
There'll be time enough for countin' when the dealin's done."

ADM Kenny Rogers, "The Gambler"

RogueExec

5 June 2001, 16:38

Originally posted by grrlcop74:
You, DFC bay-bbbeeeee, you!!!! LOL

Kristen

Careful, DFC......she'll haul out the Hoover with all 20 attachments on your ass!!!

DFC5343

5 June 2001, 18:06

She already has...and I like it http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

RogueExec

6 June 2001, 11:42

Originally posted by DFC5343:
She already has...and I like it http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

Oh. Well......in that case...nevermind. http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

I still don't like that one with the little brush on it.......I don't care what they say, that thing tickles, man.

Watsy

6 June 2001, 16:44

Rogue,
That's because you are NOT suppose to do it
to yourself or til you turn "blue". For your
pleasure means let someone "do it" to you...
Maybe you lost the instructions along the way...I guess that's why the good stuff has
"C" and "D" batteries they figure the battery will died before you can "really"
hurt yourself...or so I have been told.

------------------
Take calculated risks.
That is quite different from being rash.
George S. Patton

DFC5343

6 June 2001, 18:01

Fuck that she has a 350 fully blown Chevy powerplant hooked up there lads http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif

RogueExec

6 June 2001, 22:29

Originally posted by Watsy:
Rogue,
That's because you are NOT suppose to do it
to yourself or til you turn "blue". For your
pleasure means let someone "do it" to you...
Maybe you lost the instructions along the way...I guess that's why the good stuff has
"C" and "D" batteries they figure the battery will died before you can "really"
hurt yourself...or so I have been told.

Dammit, Watsy, when will you learn! Men don't read instructions. Remember Moses? All he had to do was stop at the local Matza Bread Store and ask directions.....but no. He had to wander in the freakin' desert for 40 years.

As for having someone else do it, well........I may have to try that once sometime.

DFC, bro, that's a typical woman for ya, using a Chevy engine when what is clearly needed is the Ford. Sheesh. http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/wink.gif