Bundy Cattle Battle: What SHOULD the BLM officers had worn, since thats the outrage?

[bucs90]

So, I was watching several Fox segments (as well as MSNBC) to see the clownish MSM response to "CATTLE BATTLE 2014". Judge Napolitano said the government was 100% right on ALL actions since they had court orders...EXCEPT what he called the outrageously excessive show of force and weapons; Same for so many other right wingers, who are outraged more about the cops (I'll refer to the BLM agents as that for now) dress and weapons.

So...what SHOULD they have worn or carried?

GUNS: As a long time gun rights supporter, I have often sided with the right about this- an AR15/M16 is FAR SAFER than a pistol or shotgun when shooting in a crowd. It is far more accurate, and thus, safer. So why are RW'ers pissed that the BLM cops had these rifles....which RW'ers themselves have argued are so much safer and more efficient than a pistol or shotgun (And they're right, it is a far more accurate, safe gun for cops in a large, crowded area. Its why the military uses them). SO, I don't see the anger in their weapons.

DRESS: You want them in pink dresses with Easter Bunny patches? They were in BDU's, which the military wears, and so happens that military surplus and companies that make this stuff is an easy, cost effective way of dressing cops too. They are rugged, durable, and cheap. The company 5.11 specializes in that stuff. Now....should they all be wearing Andy Griffith polyester style uniforms? Um, no. Not for that environment (you know- rugged, dusty, working environment). So what about the "dress uniform" that you see most patrol cops in? Some were wearing that in khaki. But tactical units don't. They were uniforms that have more pockets (for stuff like extra flashlights, batteries, medical kits, etc) that regular patrol cops don't carry on their uniform for various reasons. So, its smarter and more cost efficient to dress them in stuff that is already mass produced (military), is good for protection (its why military uses it) and is effective in tactical situations (again....its why the military uses it).

Next, a Police Academy lesson for some of you. Many are outraged at the dress, equipment, AND sheer number of officers that arrived.

Do you folks realize that the MORE cops that are there, the LESS it justifies deadly force? That's right. The landmark court case Graham vs Connor which lays out police use of force says all force must be "reasonable and necessary".

And case law shows that if, say, 2 cops get attacked by 10 men, they can SHOOT those men; Because it is reasonable to think that 2 cops will LOSE a fight against 10 men, and possibly take their own guns and kill them. But what about 8 cops vs 10 men??? Nope. They likely would not meet the standard for deadly force.

So, if there are 500 protestors, and they get agitated, and they push forward towards 10 patrol cops with dress uniforms on and just pistols......there is a chance those cops could resort to deadly force to stop that perceived push towards them by 500 people.

BUT, if those 500 people pushed towards, say, 250 cops with tactical gear, rifles, shields, etc.....then the "reasonable and necessary" standard is MUCH higher, and those 250 cops would have almost no justification for using deadly force. So, in reality, the MORE cops and MORE tactical equipment that they have.......the LOWER the chance that they can legally use it against a crowd of people.

Just thought I'd drop some info to cut into the nonsense we're seeing on Fox, MSNBC and all the other whacko news agencies. I just don't get the anger of "OH MY GOD LOOK WHAT THEY ARE WEARING AND THE EQUIPMENT THEY HAVE, TYRANNY!!!".

 

[DriftingSand]

Doesn't matter what they should have worn. They simply should have knocked on his door with the local sheriff present and discussed things person to person. No need to overdo things with a show of bravado and overbearance. All they're wearing now is shame (or they should be).

 

[Moonglow]

Cocktail frocks would have been nice...

 

[bucs90]

To put it an a smaller scale; Lets say a suicidal person is on a front porch, and he has a large knife. If a patrol cop dressed like Andy Griffith walks up to him to try to talk to him and convince him not to kill himself, and the guy jumps towards the cop, the cop can shoot him since the man has a large knife.

BUT, if the patrol SGT instead calls the SWAT team, and they show up in a black armored car (TYRANNY) and 8 SWAT cops with rifles and tac gear (TYRANNY) and they park in the front yard, and the guy rushed the armored car..............they cant shoot him. They are in no danger. Whats he gonna do, stab the car?

And then a SWAT cop can stand up through the door in the roof, and maybe tase the guy, or use pepper spray launched from a paint ball gun.

And then the guy is subdued, and taken to the hospital for some mental help. No one dead. No shot fired. But oh the "MILITARIZED POLICE" chants will begin.

Or Andy Griffith could just walk up on the guy, get stabbed in the neck, and shoot the guy to death as he bleeds out before EMS gets there.

If YOUR son or daughter was a cop, which would you prefer?

 

[Iceweasel]

You've been watching a different FOX channel than me.

 

[bucs90]

Doesn't matter what they should have worn. They simply should have knocked on his door with the local sheriff present and discussed things person to person. No need to overdo things with a show of bravado and overbearance. All they're wearing now is shame (or they should be).

Well....they have tried the "talking" way for 21 years; Bundy didn't want to go that route. Eventually, a person with big guns who does not want to "talk" to the government has to be brought to his justice.

Its ugly; And I agree it was a really stupid fucking law they got tasked with enforcing.

But if you HAVE to enforce it, do it the way that will be safest for EVERYONE.

 

[bucs90]

You've been watching a different FOX channel than me.

Really? It would have been O'Reilly, with Judge Napolitano. Kinda a popular show.

 

[Iceweasel]

To put it an a smaller scale; Lets say a suicidal person is on a front porch, and he has a large knife. If a patrol cop dressed like Andy Griffith walks up to him to try to talk to him and convince him not to kill himself, and the guy jumps towards the cop, the cop can shoot him since the man has a large knife.

BUT, if the patrol SGT instead calls the SWAT team, and they show up in a black armored car (TYRANNY) and 8 SWAT cops with rifles and tac gear (TYRANNY) and they park in the front yard, and the guy rushed the armored car..............they cant shoot him. They are in no danger. Whats he gonna do, stab the car?

And then a SWAT cop can stand up through the door in the roof, and maybe tase the guy, or use pepper spray launched from a paint ball gun.

And then the guy is subdued, and taken to the hospital for some mental help. No one dead. No shot fired. But oh the "MILITARIZED POLICE" chants will begin.

Or Andy Griffith could just walk up on the guy, get stabbed in the neck, and shoot the guy to death as he bleeds out before EMS gets there.

If YOUR son or daughter was a cop, which would you prefer?

I've never heard of a guy getting shot for attacking a SWAT vehicle or even a patrol vehicle. What movie was that on?

 

[Iceweasel]

You've been watching a different FOX channel than me.

Really? It would have been O'Reilly, with Judge Napolitano. Kinda a popular show.

I've seen him pontificate numerous times on it. Never heard anything about the clothes or specific weapons, just the army sized show of force. His main point is that they could have put a lien on the property, the cows and turtles were getting along fabulously. Well, he didn't say it like that exactly, might have been the gay guy.

 

[DriftingSand]

To put it an a smaller scale; Lets say a suicidal person is on a front porch, and he has a large knife. If a patrol cop dressed like Andy Griffith walks up to him to try to talk to him and convince him not to kill himself, and the guy jumps towards the cop, the cop can shoot him since the man has a large knife.

BUT, if the patrol SGT instead calls the SWAT team, and they show up in a black armored car (TYRANNY) and 8 SWAT cops with rifles and tac gear (TYRANNY) and they park in the front yard, and the guy rushed the armored car..............they cant shoot him. They are in no danger. Whats he gonna do, stab the car?

And then a SWAT cop can stand up through the door in the roof, and maybe tase the guy, or use pepper spray launched from a paint ball gun.

And then the guy is subdued, and taken to the hospital for some mental help. No one dead. No shot fired. But oh the "MILITARIZED POLICE" chants will begin.

Or Andy Griffith could just walk up on the guy, get stabbed in the neck, and shoot the guy to death as he bleeds out before EMS gets there.

If YOUR son or daughter was a cop, which would you prefer?

But Bundy wasn't wielding a knife or even a rock. He wasn't posing a threat to the armed assailants.

 

[MACAULAY]

I think they ought to wear the same uniforms that Putin's thugs wore in the Crimea and now in E. Ukraine...and for the same reason---they both work for a totalitarian out-of-control Gang...one from Moscow and the other from Chicago.

When the American people supported the Patriot Act, they thought it was necessary to protect them from Lunatic Muslims who have declared war on us because we are Infidels. We do offensive things like let women vote and drive.

But to Obama and his apparachnicks, a "Terrorist" is any white boy with a deer rifle from Montana to Mississippi.

God Bless those Cowboys who sent Harry Reid's lackey army packing.

 

[bucs90]

To put it an a smaller scale; Lets say a suicidal person is on a front porch, and he has a large knife. If a patrol cop dressed like Andy Griffith walks up to him to try to talk to him and convince him not to kill himself, and the guy jumps towards the cop, the cop can shoot him since the man has a large knife.

BUT, if the patrol SGT instead calls the SWAT team, and they show up in a black armored car (TYRANNY) and 8 SWAT cops with rifles and tac gear (TYRANNY) and they park in the front yard, and the guy rushed the armored car..............they cant shoot him. They are in no danger. Whats he gonna do, stab the car?

And then a SWAT cop can stand up through the door in the roof, and maybe tase the guy, or use pepper spray launched from a paint ball gun.

And then the guy is subdued, and taken to the hospital for some mental help. No one dead. No shot fired. But oh the "MILITARIZED POLICE" chants will begin.

Or Andy Griffith could just walk up on the guy, get stabbed in the neck, and shoot the guy to death as he bleeds out before EMS gets there.

If YOUR son or daughter was a cop, which would you prefer?

I've never heard of a guy getting shot for attacking a SWAT vehicle or even a patrol vehicle. What movie was that on?

Cops get ambushed sitting in their vehicles every year. Most times the cop is killed, since he is caught off guard. Very tragic, but, some times they get a shot off and kill the POS who does it.

Rarely does a person get shot for advancing on an armored SWAT vehicle; Because the vehicle is secure and armored, there is no imminent threat to the cops, so they don't have the "reasonable and necessary" standard set by Graham vs Connor to shoot him since he cannot hurt them.

The BLM may have had an "army" of people there; But they were still outnumbered by protestors; See my original thread- the greater the ratio of being outnumbered, the more reasonable it is for cops to use higher force; But they rarely do. Usually, they call in more and more cops to even up the numbers, which actually raises the standard for use of force.

So, legally, you'd think the anti-govt crowed would demand MORE cops, so that they cant say "we were outnumbered" as an excuse to use high levels of force. But, that legal, common sense approach isn't usually what we see in the media.

 

[bucs90]

To put it an a smaller scale; Lets say a suicidal person is on a front porch, and he has a large knife. If a patrol cop dressed like Andy Griffith walks up to him to try to talk to him and convince him not to kill himself, and the guy jumps towards the cop, the cop can shoot him since the man has a large knife.

BUT, if the patrol SGT instead calls the SWAT team, and they show up in a black armored car (TYRANNY) and 8 SWAT cops with rifles and tac gear (TYRANNY) and they park in the front yard, and the guy rushed the armored car..............they cant shoot him. They are in no danger. Whats he gonna do, stab the car?

And then a SWAT cop can stand up through the door in the roof, and maybe tase the guy, or use pepper spray launched from a paint ball gun.

And then the guy is subdued, and taken to the hospital for some mental help. No one dead. No shot fired. But oh the "MILITARIZED POLICE" chants will begin.

Or Andy Griffith could just walk up on the guy, get stabbed in the neck, and shoot the guy to death as he bleeds out before EMS gets there.

If YOUR son or daughter was a cop, which would you prefer?

But Bundy wasn't wielding a knife or even a rock. He wasn't posing a threat to the armed assailants.

But the hundreds of protestors were packing serious firepower. And, Bundy owns guns.

Go to ANY police dept in the nation, and if they are going to serve a court order on a guy with guns in the home and an expressed intent to not abide by any government order......they aren't showing up with Andy and Barney and a couple six shooters.

There have been far too many cops killed doing it the old fashioned Mayberry way to keep doing it that way. Sorry, that's just how it is now. Cops and their families are tired of seeing them get killed doing it the Mayberry way.

 

[occupied]

To put it an a smaller scale; Lets say a suicidal person is on a front porch, and he has a large knife. If a patrol cop dressed like Andy Griffith walks up to him to try to talk to him and convince him not to kill himself, and the guy jumps towards the cop, the cop can shoot him since the man has a large knife.

BUT, if the patrol SGT instead calls the SWAT team, and they show up in a black armored car (TYRANNY) and 8 SWAT cops with rifles and tac gear (TYRANNY) and they park in the front yard, and the guy rushed the armored car..............they cant shoot him. They are in no danger. Whats he gonna do, stab the car?

And then a SWAT cop can stand up through the door in the roof, and maybe tase the guy, or use pepper spray launched from a paint ball gun.

And then the guy is subdued, and taken to the hospital for some mental help. No one dead. No shot fired. But oh the "MILITARIZED POLICE" chants will begin.

Or Andy Griffith could just walk up on the guy, get stabbed in the neck, and shoot the guy to death as he bleeds out before EMS gets there.

If YOUR son or daughter was a cop, which would you prefer?

But Bundy wasn't wielding a knife or even a rock. He wasn't posing a threat to the armed assailants.

But the hundreds of protestors were packing serious firepower. And, Bundy owns guns.

Go to ANY police dept in the nation, and if they are going to serve a court order on a guy with guns in the home and an expressed intent to not abide by any government order......they aren't showing up with Andy and Barney and a couple six shooters.

There have been far too many cops killed doing it the old fashioned Mayberry way to keep doing it that way. Sorry, that's just how it is now. Cops and their families are tired of seeing them get killed doing it the Mayberry way.

Generally, reasonable people get treated reasonably, unreasonable people are treated otherwise. The more I hear it seems the response was as cautious as a bunch of paranoid federal law dogs could make it considering the crazy people they were dealing with.

 

[Rozman]

A shirt that said ....

Harry sent us...

 

[Iceweasel]

Rarely does a person get shot for advancing on an armored SWAT vehicle; Because the vehicle is secure and armored, there is no imminent threat to the cops, so they don't have the "reasonable and necessary" standard set by Graham vs Connor to shoot him since he cannot hurt them.

The BLM may have had an "army" of people there; But they were still outnumbered by protestors; See my original thread- the greater the ratio of being outnumbered, the more reasonable it is for cops to use higher force; But they rarely do. Usually, they call in more and more cops to even up the numbers, which actually raises the standard for use of force.

So, legally, you'd think the anti-govt crowed would demand MORE cops, so that they cant say "we were outnumbered" as an excuse to use high levels of force. But, that legal, common sense approach isn't usually what we see in the media.

The BLM weren't originally outnumbered. I remember the lefties laughing at all the militia that didn't show up. Graham vs Conner didn't set a standard, it is the examination of the totality of the circumstances. In other words, when it isn't a clear cut case of justifiable use of force.

There's no relevance here though. If the shit hit the fan and bullets started flying it wouldn't be a matter of the agents legal use of force, clearly they were there in an official capacity legally. I haven't heard anyone say the government acted illegally, just too heavy handed and had been for quite a while leading up to this.

 

[occupied]

Rarely does a person get shot for advancing on an armored SWAT vehicle; Because the vehicle is secure and armored, there is no imminent threat to the cops, so they don't have the "reasonable and necessary" standard set by Graham vs Connor to shoot him since he cannot hurt them.

The BLM may have had an "army" of people there; But they were still outnumbered by protestors; See my original thread- the greater the ratio of being outnumbered, the more reasonable it is for cops to use higher force; But they rarely do. Usually, they call in more and more cops to even up the numbers, which actually raises the standard for use of force.

So, legally, you'd think the anti-govt crowed would demand MORE cops, so that they cant say "we were outnumbered" as an excuse to use high levels of force. But, that legal, common sense approach isn't usually what we see in the media.

The BLM weren't originally outnumbered. I remember the lefties laughing at all the militia that didn't show up. Graham vs Conner didn't set a standard, it is the examination of the totality of the circumstances. In other words, when it isn't a clear cut case of justifiable use of force.

There's no relevance here though. If the shit hit the fan and bullets started flying it wouldn't be a matter of the agents legal use of force, clearly they were there in an official capacity legally. I haven't heard anyone say the government acted illegally, just too heavy handed and had been for quite a while leading up to this.

Just wait till next time, this shit had to hurt their feelings, probably going to kill some dumbasses over stupid shit..

 

[Stephanie]

I think they ought to wear the same uniforms that Putin's thugs wore in the Crimea and now in E. Ukraine...and for the same reason---they both work for a totalitarian out-of-control Gang...one from Moscow and the other from Chicago.

When the American people supported the Patriot Act, they thought it was necessary to protect them from Lunatic Muslims who have declared war on us because we are Infidels. We do offensive things like let women vote and drive.

But to Obama and his apparachnicks, a "Terrorist" is any white boy with a deer rifle from Montana to Mississippi.

God Bless those Cowboys who sent Harry Reid's lackey army packing.

 

[JakeStarkey]

To put it an a smaller scale; Lets say a suicidal person is on a front porch, and he has a large knife. If a patrol cop dressed like Andy Griffith walks up to him to try to talk to him and convince him not to kill himself, and the guy jumps towards the cop, the cop can shoot him since the man has a large knife.

BUT, if the patrol SGT instead calls the SWAT team, and they show up in a black armored car (TYRANNY) and 8 SWAT cops with rifles and tac gear (TYRANNY) and they park in the front yard, and the guy rushed the armored car..............they cant shoot him. They are in no danger. Whats he gonna do, stab the car?

And then a SWAT cop can stand up through the door in the roof, and maybe tase the guy, or use pepper spray launched from a paint ball gun.

And then the guy is subdued, and taken to the hospital for some mental help. No one dead. No shot fired. But oh the "MILITARIZED POLICE" chants will begin.

Or Andy Griffith could just walk up on the guy, get stabbed in the neck, and shoot the guy to death as he bleeds out before EMS gets there.

If YOUR son or daughter was a cop, which would you prefer?

I've never heard of a guy getting shot for attacking a SWAT vehicle or even a patrol vehicle. What movie was that on?

What world do you live in? You attack LEO vehicles in Salt Lake valley with anything other than your hands, you are taking a real chance you will be shot.

 

[blackhawk]

The feds could simply have put a lien on the property and no one would have had to go through any of this.