WELCOME TO RIVER DAVES PLACE

We found a loophole boys.....

CarolynandBob

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2016
Messages
2,291
Reaction score
4,058
Ok Bob. Did I not say, "judge away"? Of course you can give your opinion, but if you jump into a conversation at least pay attention to the context. My comment about not being surprised about the actions of the FED in the video is directly related to my actual real life experience with FED's, and that specific incident. I am not surprised a FED acted that way because the majority of them don't do basic police work. Think back to my comment on what a big umbrella the label of FED actually covers. That is far different than trying to disparage an entire group of people because of a so called "requirement" to get hired.

Ya know @t&y he's gotta point here.. Not taking sides.. just saying all cops don't want to be lumped together, so maybe it isn't really fair to lump all the Feds together either.

Either way I think we can all move on.. or just do what we do when peeps are hating on cops and say "They aren't all bad.. maybe 2% of FEDS are bad." so everyone gets along. :)

RD

T&Y - RD gets the exact point I was making. I get that most local LEO's don't like feds, it had nothing to do with police work etc... It was lumping all feds.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
702
Reaction score
1,066
Am I the only one completely blind sided to the idea that cops don’t like feds and vice versa? I thought that shit just happened in die hard movies.
Dave, in my experience (28 years and counting) SOME feds treat local cops like we are their little “bitch boys”. I would say that as a rule the feds who were local cops before they became feds are much better to work with because they understand the big picture of how street police work happens. To answer your question though I would say there definitely is a riff between locals and feds and most of the time it’s because of pompous feds with no real street experience treating locals like second class citizens.
 

Dettom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
2,855
Dave, in my experience (28 years and counting) SOME feds treat local cops like we are their little “bitch boys”. I would say that as a rule the feds who were local cops before they became feds are much better to work with because they understand the big picture of how street police work happens. To answer your question though I would say there definitely is a riff between locals and feds and most of the time it’s because of pompous feds with no real street experience treating locals like second class citizens.
You are so right.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
702
Reaction score
1,066
You know, now that I watch it again, I'm not really sure. I guess I had more of an issue with the police automatically believing the person calling in maybe? He obviously didn't handle it well. I am pro police, but I see way too many of them acting stupid too.
When a cop receives a radio call he or she has many things to evaluate. The very first thing to evaluate is “what is the reporting party saying?” Does that mean the cop should automatically take that information at face value? Of course not. On the way to the call the cop continues the evaluation process. The thought process goes like this: “Do I have prior knowledge of the reporting party?” “Do I have prior knowledge of the location I’m responding to?” “Do I have prior knowledge, experience or training regarding the type of call I responding to?”
Once the cop arrived the evaluation process continues. “What do I see?” “What do I hear?” So in this video the cop arrives with all these factors in his head and sees a man near the door of the reporting party’s home. The man is not wearing any clothing or body armor clearly identifying him as a law enforcement officer. The cop is now continuing his evaluation in his head. Cop should be thinking at this point, “Ok maybe he’s a plainclothes cop or fed but maybe, just maybe, he’s not.” So should the cop completely let his guard down and just assume this guy is not a threat? Hell no, not unless he wants to be a dead cop starring in a training film after his funeral.
So the cop makes the decision to verbally address the “maybe a burglar maybe a cop.” When the cop verbally addressed the guy the very first response he received was, “I’m a fucking fed.” Now the whole tone of this call changes. As a cop I would of been thinking “Why is this guy talking to me this way?” The cop is now continuing his evaluation process and evaluating the situation. At that point the cop made the decision that he was going to detain this guy. The cop never used profanity and told this guy what to do. The ATF agent refused to cooperate and eventually was handcuffed and given a little shock therapy. This whole situation could have been resolved in a much easier fashion if the ATF guy didn’t let his ego override his common sense. I would also assume that this ATF agent was already pissed off before the cop arrived because somebody refused to open the door for him.
It is common knowledge in law enforcement when you are working plain clothes or undercover you GO WITH THE PROGRAM when you are contacted by uniformed cops.
Duramax, the point of my whole post here is to disagree with your opinion that the uniformed cop “handled it wrong.” I also tried to explain to you the process of handling a radio call. The reporting party’s statement is just the first part of a cop’s evaluation process of a situation. It doesn’t matter if the cop believes or doesn’t believe what is dispatched to him or her, the call still needs to be handled. Thousands of cops handle thousands of radio calls every day. The process I described above happens on every call, whether it’s a shoplifter or a shooting. Thanks for listening.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
27,510
T&Y - RD gets the exact point I was making. I get that most local LEO's don't like feds, it had nothing to do with police work etc... It was lumping all feds.
Cool with me. Not what I was saying here but I get why you read it that way.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
27,510
Dave, in my experience (28 years and counting) SOME feds treat local cops like we are their little “bitch boys”. I would say that as a rule the feds who were local cops before they became feds are much better to work with because they understand the big picture of how street police work happens. To answer your question though I would say there definitely is a riff between locals and feds and most of the time it’s because of pompous feds with no real street experience treating locals like second class citizens.
Yeah, you either get it or you don't. From the outside I completely understand why these guys don't view it in the same manner. They simply don't know the business... I wouldn't understand the dynamics either if I wasn't a Cop. I've worked side by side with some solid Fed's, but they knew their role and I knew mine. The fed in the first scenario was a complete jackass, plain and simple. I'm STILL not surprised. 😂
 

j21black

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
1,134
Reaction score
2,103
is it is the job of the police to DE-ESCALATE situations, not to escalate them.



RD

And the ATF agent should be aware of that as well. Pretty sure being a private citizen, a federal agent, or Joe Biden (if not known who he is), saying I am not going to do that, is only going to escalate the situation, no matter who is right or wrong.......

And it gets even worse when it is known that the said individual (ATF agent in this case) is armed.
 

Flying_Lavey

Dreaming of the lake
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
20,405
Reaction score
17,196
When a cop receives a radio call he or she has many things to evaluate. The very first thing to evaluate is “what is the reporting party saying?” Does that mean the cop should automatically take that information at face value? Of course not. On the way to the call the cop continues the evaluation process. The thought process goes like this: “Do I have prior knowledge of the reporting party?” “Do I have prior knowledge of the location I’m responding to?” “Do I have prior knowledge, experience or training regarding the type of call I responding to?”
Once the cop arrived the evaluation process continues. “What do I see?” “What do I hear?” So in this video the cop arrives with all these factors in his head and sees a man near the door of the reporting party’s home. The man is not wearing any clothing or body armor clearly identifying him as a law enforcement officer. The cop is now continuing his evaluation in his head. Cop should be thinking at this point, “Ok maybe he’s a plainclothes cop or fed but maybe, just maybe, he’s not.” So should the cop completely let his guard down and just assume this guy is not a threat? Hell no, not unless he wants to be a dead cop starring in a training film after his funeral.
So the cop makes the decision to verbally address the “maybe a burglar maybe a cop.” When the cop verbally addressed the guy the very first response he received was, “I’m a fucking fed.” Now the whole tone of this call changes. As a cop I would of been thinking “Why is this guy talking to me this way?” The cop is now continuing his evaluation process and evaluating the situation. At that point the cop made the decision that he was going to detain this guy. The cop never used profanity and told this guy what to do. The ATF agent refused to cooperate and eventually was handcuffed and given a little shock therapy. This whole situation could have been resolved in a much easier fashion if the ATF guy didn’t let his ego override his common sense. I would also assume that this ATF agent was already pissed off before the cop arrived because somebody refused to open the door for him.
It is common knowledge in law enforcement when you are working plain clothes or undercover you GO WITH THE PROGRAM when you are contacted by uniformed cops.
Duramax, the point of my whole post here is to disagree with your opinion that the uniformed cop “handled it wrong.” I also tried to explain to you the process of handling a radio call. The reporting party’s statement is just the first part of a cop’s evaluation process of a situation. It doesn’t matter if the cop believes or doesn’t believe what is dispatched to him or her, the call still needs to be handled. Thousands of cops handle thousands of radio calls every day. The process I described above happens on every call, whether it’s a shoplifter or a shooting. Thanks for listening.


Another thing not mentioned and the way Duramax worded his post makes it seem, the responding officers do not hear the call itself. Just what is relayed to them in a factual, truncated fashion. There is no way to interpret the callers intent or severity by the officer themselves. That is the 911 operator's job.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
702
Reaction score
1,066
Another thing not mentioned and the way Duramax worded his post makes it seem, the responding officers do not hear the call itself. Just what is relayed to them in a factual, truncated fashion. There is no way to interpret the callers intent or severity by the officer themselves. That is the 911 operator's job.
I agree with you 100%. When we receive a call from the dispatcher it is a synopsis of the actual 911 call or call for service from the public. Whether or not the call sounds like bullshit or not, it still needs to be handled. Also, it is a dangerous practice to make assumptions on the validity of a call before you start your “evaluation process.” Doing that will get you dead.
 

Duramax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
2,424
When a cop receives a radio call he or she has many things to evaluate. The very first thing to evaluate is “what is the reporting party saying?” Does that mean the cop should automatically take that information at face value? Of course not. On the way to the call the cop continues the evaluation process. The thought process goes like this: “Do I have prior knowledge of the reporting party?” “Do I have prior knowledge of the location I’m responding to?” “Do I have prior knowledge, experience or training regarding the type of call I responding to?”
Once the cop arrived the evaluation process continues. “What do I see?” “What do I hear?” So in this video the cop arrives with all these factors in his head and sees a man near the door of the reporting party’s home. The man is not wearing any clothing or body armor clearly identifying him as a law enforcement officer. The cop is now continuing his evaluation in his head. Cop should be thinking at this point, “Ok maybe he’s a plainclothes cop or fed but maybe, just maybe, he’s not.” So should the cop completely let his guard down and just assume this guy is not a threat? Hell no, not unless he wants to be a dead cop starring in a training film after his funeral.
So the cop makes the decision to verbally address the “maybe a burglar maybe a cop.” When the cop verbally addressed the guy the very first response he received was, “I’m a fucking fed.” Now the whole tone of this call changes. As a cop I would of been thinking “Why is this guy talking to me this way?” The cop is now continuing his evaluation process and evaluating the situation. At that point the cop made the decision that he was going to detain this guy. The cop never used profanity and told this guy what to do. The ATF agent refused to cooperate and eventually was handcuffed and given a little shock therapy. This whole situation could have been resolved in a much easier fashion if the ATF guy didn’t let his ego override his common sense. I would also assume that this ATF agent was already pissed off before the cop arrived because somebody refused to open the door for him.
It is common knowledge in law enforcement when you are working plain clothes or undercover you GO WITH THE PROGRAM when you are contacted by uniformed cops.
Duramax, the point of my whole post here is to disagree with your opinion that the uniformed cop “handled it wrong.” I also tried to explain to you the process of handling a radio call. The reporting party’s statement is just the first part of a cop’s evaluation process of a situation. It doesn’t matter if the cop believes or doesn’t believe what is dispatched to him or her, the call still needs to be handled. Thousands of cops handle thousands of radio calls every day. The process I described above happens on every call, whether it’s a shoplifter or a shooting. Thanks for listening.
I didn't explain myself enough. When I said he didn't handle it well, I meant the ATF agent, not the cops. Is an ATF agent, "above" a police officer per say? Can the ATF agent have anything done about the taser?
You sound like a great police officer that thinks things through, but I chuckled when you rambled off 10 things that the cop was thinking on his way there and on scene. If even half the police do as you say they do, I would be amazed.
 

Waffles

Banned
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
5,422
Reaction score
9,587
You know, now that I watch it again, I'm not really sure. I guess I had more of an issue with the police automatically believing the person calling in maybe? He obviously didn't handle it well. I am pro police, but I see way too many of them acting stupid too.
This statement in itself is fucking absurd LOL

"I guess I had more of an issue with the police automatically believing the person calling in maybe?"

Are you fuckin kidding me?
Can you imagine being in the middle of a situation like an armed robbery and having dispatch or even leo vetting how critical situation was before proceeding?
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST

*ring ring ring*
>"911 whats your emergency?

>>"theres an armed intruder scouring the rooms....please help"

>"lol are you sure? what makes you think hes an intruder? hold that thought while i vett you thoroughly before dispatching help "

*BANG*

>>"OMGOMGOMGOMG HE JUST SHOT MY WIFE/HUSBAND IN THE HEAD!!!!!"

>"lol are you sure that was a gun shot? how do you know? how do you know he didnt slam the door? ashton kutcher is this you? are you trying to punk me fam?"
 

Duramax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
2,424
Again, I'm not defending the cops in that case. I know nothing but one side. But lets be real about it here. If you are going to hold cop responsible for medical issues they are going to have to start sending us all to medical school, or make it a requirement for the job. The basic requirements under Cali laws are pretty limited in scope of how far of a scope officers have in regards to medical assistance, and for good reasons. We are not EMT, Paramedics, Nurses, Or Doctors (at lest most of us are not).
Here is a perfect example!!! Dirty Daytona says that cops will evaluate the situation from every angle, use there skill and knowledge to assess the situation before they make a move......Here, you have an older gentlemen on scene, and when you are going through your thorough evaluation process, you notice he also drives with some kind of handicap equipment. You smell NO ALCOHOL but he is having problems speaking and his face droops a little. I am not trained, but I have decent common sense, and common sense would point to some kind of event, stroke maybe, especially since zero alcohol was found in the vehicle or on the mans breath. No "special training" is needed in this event.

If even half of officers ran through this amount of evaluation that Dirty Daytona says they do, you think this would have ended like it did? No.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
27,510
I didn't explain myself enough. When I said he didn't handle it well, I meant the ATF agent, not the cops. Is an ATF agent, "above" a police officer per say? Can the ATF agent have anything done about the taser?
You sound like a great police officer that thinks things through, but I chuckled when you rambled off 10 things that the cop was thinking on his way there and on scene. If even half the police do as you say they do, I would be amazed.
Lol... Dirty Daytona has the handle here... but I just gotta laugh at your last sentence.
 

Duramax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
2,424
This statement in itself is fucking absurd LOL

"I guess I had more of an issue with the police automatically believing the person calling in maybe?"

Are you fuckin kidding me?
Can you imagine being in the middle of a situation like an armed robbery and having dispatch or even leo vetting how critical situation was before proceeding?
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST

*ring ring ring*
>"911 whats your emergency?

>>"theres an armed intruder scouring the rooms....please help"

>"lol are you sure? what makes you think hes an intruder? hold that thought while i vett you thoroughly before dispatching help "

*BANG*

>>"OMGOMGOMGOMG HE JUST SHOT MY WIFE/HUSBAND IN THE HEAD!!!!!"

>"lol are you sure that was a gun shot? how do you know? how do you know he didnt slam the door? ashton kutcher is this you? are you trying to punk me fam?"
You took a situation that had a man at the door, to armed robbery to try and talk shit on me? Got it.
 

Duramax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
2,424
Lol... Dirty Daytona has the handle here... but I just gotta laugh at your last sentence.
I understand that you stand up for your boys, and I'm perfectly ok with that.

Yes, I am sure I will get "schooled" shortly. Can't wait..
 

Flying_Lavey

Dreaming of the lake
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
20,405
Reaction score
17,196
Here is a perfect example!!! Dirty Daytona says that cops will evaluate the situation from every angle, use there skill and knowledge to assess the situation before they make a move......Here, you have an older gentlemen on scene, and when you are going through your thorough evaluation process, you notice he also drives with some kind of handicap equipment. You smell NO ALCOHOL but he is having problems speaking and his face droops a little. I am not trained, but I have decent common sense, and common sense would point to some kind of event, stroke maybe, especially since zero alcohol was found in the vehicle or on the mans breath. No "special training" is needed in this event.

If even half of officers ran through this amount of evaluation that Dirty Daytona says they do, you think this would have ended like it did? No.
You still havent shared a time frame of when this happened. Nothing makes it excusable, but the difference in training over the past even 10 years is very different.
 

Duramax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
2,424
You still havent shared a time frame of when this happened. Nothing makes it excusable, but the difference in training over the past even 10 years is very different.
I have no clue, I read it from a member here, it did not happen to me or my family thank god. Time frame is irrelevant.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
27,510
Here is a perfect example!!! Dirty Daytona says that cops will evaluate the situation from every angle, use there skill and knowledge to assess the situation before they make a move......Here, you have an older gentlemen on scene, and when you are going through your thorough evaluation process, you notice he also drives with some kind of handicap equipment. You smell NO ALCOHOL but he is having problems speaking and his face droops a little. I am not trained, but I have decent common sense, and common sense would point to some kind of event, stroke maybe, especially since zero alcohol was found in the vehicle or on the mans breath. No "special training" is needed in this event.

If even half of officers ran through this amount of evaluation that Dirty Daytona says they do, you think this would have ended like it did? No.
"Here is a perfect example" of what is wrong with much of social media and info broadcast over it. We heard a very compelling story about a tragic event. What we didn't hear (or in this case read) was the other side of that event. I have no reason to doubt C-Ya at this point, but I also have no info from the other side. George Floyd was a perfect example of how sometimes these things really aren't what they look like upon initial reporting. You think these things are easy, that's cool. You should have signed on and been a super cop.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
702
Reaction score
1,066
I didn't explain myself enough. When I said he didn't handle it well, I meant the ATF agent, not the cops. Is an ATF agent, "above" a police officer per say? Can the ATF agent have anything done about the taser?
You sound like a great police officer that thinks things through, but I chuckled when you rambled off 10 things that the cop was thinking on his way there and on scene. If even half the police do as you say they do, I would be amazed.
My mistake, sorry. I thought you were saying the cop handled it wrong. An ATF agent or any “fed” is not above a local cop, it’s apples and oranges. Feds have jurisdiction throughout the whole country and local cops have jurisdiction in the whole state. (At least in California, I’m not positive how other states operate) In my experience with working with feds, they have more power and freedom in some aspects than local cops and less in other aspects. I’m not a fed hater but I have definitely seen the pompous attitudes and lack of street smarts first hand. On the other hand, I worked on a task force for 4 years with FBI agents and these guys were legit and smart guys. The FBI agents I worked with were former street cops and former military so they were dialed in and we all worked great together.
As far as me rattling off what the cops SHOULD be thinking about when handling a call, that’s just my thought process. Most cops I’ve worked with are on that same wavelength. Notice I said “most.” There are dipshits in every profession and I would never make a blanket statement saying ALL cops or ALL feds are good or bad.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
27,510
I understand that you stand up for your boys, and I'm perfectly ok with that.

Yes, I am sure I will get "schooled" shortly. Can't wait..
Who am I standing up for? You asked him directly, I'm not going to answer for him. I'm sure he'll do just fine... lol. Your last sentence there spoke volumes is what I was pointing out.
 

Waffles

Banned
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
5,422
Reaction score
9,587
You took a situation that had a man at the door, to armed robbery to try and talk shit on me? Got it.
Youre right.....sorry for talking shit on you. Situations like that never happen here in Pleasantville USA.......wait 😂
 

Waffles

Banned
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
5,422
Reaction score
9,587

Duramax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
2,424
"Here is a perfect example" of what is wrong with much of social media and info broadcast over it. We heard a very compelling story about a tragic event. What we didn't hear (or in this case read) was the other side of that event. I have no reason to doubt C-Ya at this point, but I also have no info from the other side. George Floyd was a perfect example of how sometimes these things really aren't what they look like upon initial reporting. You think these things are easy, that's cool. You should have signed on and been a super cop.
No thanks. I am not saying in anyway this job you do is easy, far, far from it. I agree 10000% on George Floyd.
 

Duramax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
2,424
My mistake, sorry. I thought you were saying the cop handled it wrong. An ATF agent or any “fed” is not above a local cop, it’s apples and oranges. Feds have jurisdiction throughout the whole country and local cops have jurisdiction in the whole state. (At least in California, I’m not positive how other states operate) In my experience with working with feds, they have more power and freedom in some aspects than local cops and less in other aspects. I’m not a fed hater but I have definitely seen the pompous attitudes and lack of street smarts first hand. On the other hand, I worked on a task force for 4 years with FBI agents and these guys were legit and smart guys. The FBI agents I worked with were former street cops and former military so they were dialed in and we all worked great together.
As far as me rattling off what the cops SHOULD be thinking about when handling a call, that’s just my thought process. Most cops I’ve worked with are on that same wavelength. Notice I said “most.” There are dipshits in every profession and I would never make a blanket statement saying ALL cops or ALL feds are good or bad.
Absolutely there is. Much respect to you, and thank you for your response.
 

Duramax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
2,424
I DEMAND DEPARTMENTS STOP BELIEVING CALLERS AND START VETTING THEM COMPLETELY BEFORE RESPONDING TO CALLS!

It looks like the old, "police, open up" is used more than I thought. If I look at it again, a man with no badge out, tough neighborhood, and the videos you pulled up, looks like she did it right.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
702
Reaction score
1,066
Holy shit! We really need to get back to bashing firemen and their retirement benefits. 😂 😂😂
Hey 3% at 50 is 3% at 50, doesn’t matter if you’re a cop or fireman!!! I’m turning 50 in September and I’m OUT!!!!!
 

HTTP404

New But Seasoned Inmate #2002
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,438
Reaction score
6,491
Do police still do ride-alongs? I've always wanted to do that.
 

monkeyswrench

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2018
Messages
26,078
Reaction score
71,744
When a cop receives a radio call he or she has many things to evaluate. The very first thing to evaluate is “what is the reporting party saying?” Does that mean the cop should automatically take that information at face value? Of course not. On the way to the call the cop continues the evaluation process. The thought process goes like this: “Do I have prior knowledge of the reporting party?” “Do I have prior knowledge of the location I’m responding to?” “Do I have prior knowledge, experience or training regarding the type of call I responding to?”
Once the cop arrived the evaluation process continues. “What do I see?” “What do I hear?” So in this video the cop arrives with all these factors in his head and sees a man near the door of the reporting party’s home. The man is not wearing any clothing or body armor clearly identifying him as a law enforcement officer. The cop is now continuing his evaluation in his head. Cop should be thinking at this point, “Ok maybe he’s a plainclothes cop or fed but maybe, just maybe, he’s not.” So should the cop completely let his guard down and just assume this guy is not a threat? Hell no, not unless he wants to be a dead cop starring in a training film after his funeral.
So the cop makes the decision to verbally address the “maybe a burglar maybe a cop.” When the cop verbally addressed the guy the very first response he received was, “I’m a fucking fed.” Now the whole tone of this call changes. As a cop I would of been thinking “Why is this guy talking to me this way?” The cop is now continuing his evaluation process and evaluating the situation. At that point the cop made the decision that he was going to detain this guy. The cop never used profanity and told this guy what to do. The ATF agent refused to cooperate and eventually was handcuffed and given a little shock therapy. This whole situation could have been resolved in a much easier fashion if the ATF guy didn’t let his ego override his common sense. I would also assume that this ATF agent was already pissed off before the cop arrived because somebody refused to open the door for him.
It is common knowledge in law enforcement when you are working plain clothes or undercover you GO WITH THE PROGRAM when you are contacted by uniformed cops.
Duramax, the point of my whole post here is to disagree with your opinion that the uniformed cop “handled it wrong.” I also tried to explain to you the process of handling a radio call. The reporting party’s statement is just the first part of a cop’s evaluation process of a situation. It doesn’t matter if the cop believes or doesn’t believe what is dispatched to him or her, the call still needs to be handled. Thousands of cops handle thousands of radio calls every day. The process I described above happens on every call, whether it’s a shoplifter or a shooting. Thanks for listening.
"...let his ego override his common sense."

That there is the truth of the matter. Common sense should dictate that if someone clearly had the upper hand, they are in control. In this case, he was in sights of one armed officer, and then two. If it's life or death, do what you wish...but if that were the case he would have been down already. All he had to do is comply, and in a few minutes been leaning on the car, BSing about the person he was looking for. Maybe even getting knowledge of whereabouts from the beat cop.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
702
Reaction score
1,066
"...let his ego override his common sense."

That there is the truth of the matter. Common sense should dictate that if someone clearly had the upper hand, they are in control. In this case, he was in sights of one armed officer, and then two. If it's life or death, do what you wish...but if that were the case he would have been down already. All he had to do is comply, and in a few minutes been leaning on the car, BSing about the person he was looking for. Maybe even getting knowledge of whereabouts from the beat cop.
That is 100 percent fact. They would have been laughing and calling each other fuckheads and then the uniform guys would have helped him with what the ATF guy was there for originally.
 

Flying_Lavey

Dreaming of the lake
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
20,405
Reaction score
17,196
I have no clue, I read it from a member here, it did not happen to me or my family thank god. Time frame is irrelevant.
My bad. I was confused for a minute.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
 

DRYHEAT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
6,662
Reaction score
11,915
Hey 3% at 50 is 3% at 50, doesn’t matter if you’re a cop or fireman!!! I’m turning 50 in September and I’m OUT!!!!!
Then you can get a job as a FED and retire with two pensions. 😂

I feel bad for the guys who need more than just one or two years, but I’m hoping things will turn around at the next election cycle. You never know people might wake up and actually want criminals to be dealt with.🤔
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
702
Reaction score
1,066
Then you can get a job as a FED and retire with two pensions. 😂

I feel bad for the guys who need more than just one or two years, but I’m hoping things will turn around at the next election cycle. You never know people might wake up and actually want criminals to be dealt with.🤔
Yeah no thanks!!!! I’m going to make more retired than I do working. I’m thinking about maybe flipping a couple of houses to keep me busy and making LOTS of havasu trips.
 

probablecause

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
1,227
Reaction score
1,807
When a cop receives a radio call he or she has many things to evaluate. The very first thing to evaluate is “what is the reporting party saying?” Does that mean the cop should automatically take that information at face value? Of course not. On the way to the call the cop continues the evaluation process. The thought process goes like this: “Do I have prior knowledge of the reporting party?” “Do I have prior knowledge of the location I’m responding to?” “Do I have prior knowledge, experience or training regarding the type of call I responding to?”
Once the cop arrived the evaluation process continues. “What do I see?” “What do I hear?” So in this video the cop arrives with all these factors in his head and sees a man near the door of the reporting party’s home. The man is not wearing any clothing or body armor clearly identifying him as a law enforcement officer. The cop is now continuing his evaluation in his head. Cop should be thinking at this point, “Ok maybe he’s a plainclothes cop or fed but maybe, just maybe, he’s not.” So should the cop completely let his guard down and just assume this guy is not a threat? Hell no, not unless he wants to be a dead cop starring in a training film after his funeral.
So the cop makes the decision to verbally address the “maybe a burglar maybe a cop.” When the cop verbally addressed the guy the very first response he received was, “I’m a fucking fed.” Now the whole tone of this call changes. As a cop I would of been thinking “Why is this guy talking to me this way?” The cop is now continuing his evaluation process and evaluating the situation. At that point the cop made the decision that he was going to detain this guy. The cop never used profanity and told this guy what to do. The ATF agent refused to cooperate and eventually was handcuffed and given a little shock therapy. This whole situation could have been resolved in a much easier fashion if the ATF guy didn’t let his ego override his common sense. I would also assume that this ATF agent was already pissed off before the cop arrived because somebody refused to open the door for him.
It is common knowledge in law enforcement when you are working plain clothes or undercover you GO WITH THE PROGRAM when you are contacted by uniformed cops.
Duramax, the point of my whole post here is to disagree with your opinion that the uniformed cop “handled it wrong.” I also tried to explain to you the process of handling a radio call. The reporting party’s statement is just the first part of a cop’s evaluation process of a situation. It doesn’t matter if the cop believes or doesn’t believe what is dispatched to him or her, the call still needs to be handled. Thousands of cops handle thousands of radio calls every day. The process I described above happens on every call, whether it’s a shoplifter or a shooting. Thanks for listening.
I love you!
 

probablecause

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
1,227
Reaction score
1,807
Hey 3% at 50 is 3% at 50, doesn’t matter if you’re a cop or fireman!!! I’m turning 50 in September and I’m OUT!!!!!
Pulled the pin also two years ago. Get my 7k after taxes (for putting up with all of the BS you libtards who dont like my pension). Moved to Idaho (lateral) and now work for a local S.O. working fraud and getting paid with a take-home card. F'n love it.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
702
Reaction score
1,066
Pulled the pin also two years ago. Get my 7k after taxes (for putting up with all of the BS you libtards who dont like my pension). Moved to Idaho (lateral) and now work for a local S.O. working fraud and getting paid with a take-home card. F'n love it.
That’s awesome man!!!! I’m not going to work another LE job but you are doing it right double dipping!!! Nice.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
27,510
Pulled the pin also two years ago. Get my 7k after taxes (for putting up with all of the BS you libtards who dont like my pension). Moved to Idaho (lateral) and now work for a local S.O. working fraud and getting paid with a take-home card. F'n love it.
Bunch of friends doing that. Some have already moved, and just fly back and forth each week for work while riding out their last couple years.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
27,510
That’s awesome man!!!! I’m not going to work another LE job but you are doing it right double dipping!!! Nice.
Yeah, it would have to be a pretty sweet deal for me to jump back in after retirement. I'm thinking of getting a job somewhere that will get me discounts on my hobbies is more in line with my future. 😂
 

RiverDave

In it to win it
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
123,232
Reaction score
150,643
"Here is a perfect example" of what is wrong with much of social media and info broadcast over it. We heard a very compelling story about a tragic event. What we didn't hear (or in this case read) was the other side of that event. I have no reason to doubt C-Ya at this point, but I also have no info from the other side. George Floyd was a perfect example of how sometimes these things really aren't what they look like upon initial reporting. You think these things are easy, that's cool. You should have signed on and been a super cop.

While George’s death may have been caused from drugs.. That knee on the neck deal was completely crazy to me.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
27,510
While George’s death may have been caused from drugs.. That knee on the neck deal was completely crazy to me.
I've done the knee on the neck things multiple times Dave. Usually it's part of a high risk arrest where someone is proned out on the ground. We are teaching new tactics that actually better, but it is not universal across the nation. The cop in that scenario fucked up by not putting drug user on his side. The knee didn't kill him, the drugs did.
 
Top