DHS Preparing For War Against U.S. Citizens

[Randall53]

Meh, discussion/arguement/debate = semantics again.
Normally I don't mind chasing semi-relevant tangencies, I'm just limited on my free time today & I apologize if I am coming off sounding curt.
I do not recall reading a response addressing the actual issue regarding the "militarization" of our domestic law enforcement agencies ... or the reason's why our federal agencies are being "armed to the teeth" under this administration.
Only assertions & reassurances that our LEA/LEO's (or military) would never comply with or obey unConstitutional orders, however I believe the recent events in Boston clearly show that to be a misguided belief.
Or did we all just imagine that we watched a video of armed law enforcement officers locking down the entire city of Boston & going door to door forcefully removing homeowners at gunpoint & unlawfully searching hundred(s) of homes w/out a warrant & w/out consent?
Is it "looney" to believe that actually happened? Or "tin-foil-hattery" to think that it could happen again?
What's to stop it? Nothing, not the Constitution, not the military, not the other LEO's stopped it from happening in Boston. Who or what will prevent it from happening again?

Not only did the Constitution not even slow them down, but they were looking for only ONE 19 year old bean pole? Just why could this have not been an exercise/experiment to see just how far they could go with no retribution?

[DaveTN]

Not only did the Constitution not even slow them down, but they were looking for only ONE 19 year old bean pole? Just why could this have not been an exercise/experiment to see just how far they could go with no retribution?

They were looking for a 19 year old that had bombed a bunch of people, executed a Police Officer, detonated bombs during a shootout with Police and ran over his own brother with an SUV; contributing to his death. I don’t know that a better scenario could be written for Exigent Circumstances…. Could it? This suspect was an on-going immediate credible threat to anyone in the area.  

 
The suspect was located and taken into custody alive.
 
Have any of those people complained that their rights were violated? I’ve not seen or heard any interviews with them; what have they had to say?

[RichardR]

They were looking for a 19 year old that had bombed a bunch of people, executed a Police Officer, detonated bombs during a shootout with Police and ran over his own brother with an SUV; contributing to his death. I don’t know that a better scenario could be written for Exigent Circumstances…. Could it? This suspect was an on-going immediate credible threat to anyone in the area.

The suspect was located and taken into custody alive.

Have any of those people complained that their rights were violated? I’ve not seen or heard any interviews with them; what have they had to say?

So its safe to assume you approve?

[Randall53]

They were looking for a 19 year old that had bombed a bunch of people, executed a Police Officer, detonated bombs during a shootout with Police and ran over his own brother with an SUV; contributing to his death. I don’t know that a better scenario could be written for Exigent Circumstances…. Could it? This suspect was an on-going immediate credible threat to anyone in the area.  
 
The suspect was located and taken into custody alive.
 
Have any of those people complained that their rights were violated? I’ve not seen or heard any interviews with them; what have they had to say?

I don't agree with you at all. From what you just posted, the older extremest and radical brother was just along for the ride and the beanpole regular 'ol Rambo.

[Daniel]

 

This bull#### again??????  Here you go: http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/62043-dhs-purchases-2700-light-armored-tanks/ and to save you some time (even though he went through and edited his article, the numbers haven't changed): http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/03/robert-farago/the-truth-about-the-dhs-mraps/

 

Its not 2700 vics. 

 

And it's not 1.6 Billion rounds of ammunition.  That was cleared up.  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/26/reps-challenge-dhs-ammo-buys-say-agency-using-1000-more-rounds-per-person-than/   1.3k-ish per person?  I laugh at that.  Sounds like a good weekend or a pistol course or two.  350 for the Army?  Sounds about right.....and thats ####ing embarrassing.  The only reason I'm able to shoot as much as I can is that I'm in Afghanistan.....and I'm still having trouble sourcing 9mm. 9mm in Garrison is even worse.

 

Who falls under DHS for this training/duty ammo?  CBP, ICE, Air Marshals, USSS, FLETC, Coast Guard, INS, etc.  There are a lot of agencies who need to train.  Don't cry foul when they ask for ammo .

 

Its also an IDIQ contract, not a purchase order. 

 

Also, this "retired" Captain....what's his deal?  I would love, love, love to read his OER's.  Just reading the last entry on his bio makes me wonder: http://combatsoldier.wordpress.com/about/  He was NOT in the 82nd.

 

 

Hahaha funny enough I took the last one from DHHB today.  I'm a sucker for the things.  I haven't seen a Cliff Bar in any of the DFACs here.

 

 

And to clear up a bit about my last post about the CPT for non-military.  He may have been in a PRT attached to the 82nd (which he was) but his bio intentionally makes it appear the he was IN the 82nd, if that makes sense.  It's a subtle difference that people try to expoloit.  He can wear their SSI on his right sleeve but not his left (because he deployed at less than a company level - he can wear the next higher unit's SSI as his "combat patch").  He, like me, deployed with USACAPOC/CACOM.  Just because I'm part of JCTF-3 does not mean I am in 3rd Infantry Division.  I am ADCON to them....the miserable bastards that they are.

 

FWIW, I think it would be cool if DHS wanted to share some of that ammo with little ol' me.... :wave:

You are CAPOC? CA? PO?

 

I seem to recall you had a negative opinion of PSYOP previously.

Edited June 16, 2013 by Daniel

[scoutfsu]

 

 

You are CAPOC? CA? PO?

 

I seem to recall you had a negative opinion of PSYOP previously.

CA.  I have zero problems with PSYOP/MISO.  The only reason I didn't end up PSYOP is that you guys were in N'ville and you were overstrength in 2011 when I ETS'ed.  My experiences with you guys has been positive......I appreciate that you guys seem to maintain a meateater mindset.  My guys would rather give out teddybears, US Tax dollars, and cry about having to show up for PT.

 

 

Daniel, I think you might be thinking of this thread.....
http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/49501-us-army-training-in-st-louis-city-streets/page-2?hl=

Edited June 16, 2013 by scoutfsu

[dats82]

They were looking for a 19 year old that had bombed a bunch of people, executed a Police Officer, detonated bombs during a shootout with Police and ran over his own brother with an SUV; contributing to his death. I don’t know that a better scenario could be written for Exigent Circumstances…. Could it? This suspect was an on-going immediate credible threat to anyone in the area.  

 
The suspect was located and taken into custody alive.
 
Have any of those people complained that their rights were violated? I’ve not seen or heard any interviews with them; what have they had to say?

 

And even after all that, who located the suspect?  A private citizen.  Perhaps people would have found their tactics easier to accept had they actually found the suspect. 

 

 

 

 

BTW, all TDA are RFA.

Edited June 16, 2013 by dats82

[partypilot1]

If Chavez had a playbook, I would say Obama has read it. What I saw there would and could happen here. One big sign is the mass exodus in government brass, during the polarization, I think we are seeing some of that, next will come imprisonment of opposition (political) or the fear of it. Edited June 16, 2013 by partypilot1

[DaveTN]

 

So its safe to assume you approve?

I wasn’t there and don’t know what information they were acting on. I don’t know what they said to those people when they talked to them at the door. Pointing rifles at the people as they exited the house is not something I would have done.

Have any of those people complained that their rights were violated? I saw conversation at the door before the people came out or any Officers went in. Have we heard from any of those people what that conversation was?
 

I don't agree with you at all. From what you just posted, the older extremest and radical brother was just along for the ride and the beanpole regular 'ol Rambo.

Where do you get that? That certainly was not my intent.
 

And even after all that, who located the suspect?  A private citizen.  Perhaps people would have found their tactics easier to accept had they actually found the suspect.

Many pursuits and chases end with citizens calling in where the suspects are. They did find him.

[dats82]

 
Many pursuits and chases end with citizens calling in where the suspects are. They did find him.

 

So you agree that the invasive tactics used by the LEOs are not what located the suspect but rather an observant civilian who alerted police?  If that is true, how can you argue in support of the tactics used by the LEOs? 

 

I know hindsight is 20/20, but having this hindsight and knowing that there tactics did not produce results, it is not unreasonable to say that the searches were an unnecessary invasion of privacy and perhaps violation of constitutional rights.

[RobertNashville]

Purely my impression here (I claim not "special" insight or training) but I see two big factors at play here when it comes to the militarization of government agencies including federal, State and local law enforcement.

 

One factor is simply a gradual and perhaps inevitable move toward a totalitarian state; it happens with every new law and every new set of politicians who enters office - government grows as surely as a weed grows from tiny plant to an ugly, large growth in your otherwise perfect front yard.  After all, except for a handful of true believers, no one really wants government to shrink because that ultimately means less power for the ruling class.  Giving military or military style weapons to agencies like DHS or the IRS or the EPA is just an extension of that inevitable growth.

 

The other factor going on, and this one is more "local" I believe (or at least seen more locally) is that older cops who have been on the job for 15 or 20 or 30 years grew up in a very different time (and different educational system)...most of them simply have never thought that "guns" in the hands of mere citizens was a threat or was not the "norm"...even in Ohio where I grew up, it was not at all unusual for a high school kid to go to school with his rifle or shotgun in the trunk of his car because he was either coming from an early morning hunt or was going to go hunting after school...in grade school we played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with "fingers" and arms for guns and bows/arrows and no one got expelled from school.  Today if you even have a cookie in the shape of a "gun" or draw one on a piece of paper you'll get expelled and psychological counseling...and guess what!  The cops on the force today that are just coming on or have only been on the job a few years; they grew up in that "guns are bad" environment and likely don't even like guns at all themselves.

 

So yes...I see some real problems from State and local law enforcement toward normal citizens that I don't believe was there before and I don't think it's going to get better any time soon. That's why, I believe, what we saw happen in Boston is the new norm...everybody, including most citizens, seem willing to throw "rights" right out of the window because it's for the "greater good".

 

Now, if a LEO comes to my door under the circumstances we had in Boston and asked politely if they could search my home/property I'd probably let them but I'd do so, at least believing, that I had the right to say NO unless they had a good warrant...I'd do that because I wouldn't want to impede a search for an obviously dangerous person unless there was really good reason for me to do so.

 

Back to DHS...are they arming for war?  I don't really think so but if they are, they may well find one.

Edited June 16, 2013 by RobertNashville

[DaveTN]

So you agree that the invasive tactics used by the LEOs are not what located the suspect but rather an observant civilian who alerted police?  If that is true, how can you argue in support of the tactics used by the LEOs? 
 
I know hindsight is 20/20, but having this hindsight and knowing that there tactics did not produce results, it is not unreasonable to say that the searches were an unnecessary invasion of privacy and perhaps violation of constitutional rights.

 
I am as happy as anyone else here to arm chair quarterback, and make wild azz guesses and assumptions based on what we read on the internet. But I do still try to get factual information when I can. Did the Officers ask permission to search? Is there someone claiming their rights was violated?

As I said before I doubt many could write a better scenario for exigent circumstances. These Officers were involved in a terrorist attack with citizens killed and everyone in the area of these suspects in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm. When the suspect stopped his ongoing attack on the population; he surrendered and was taken into custody.
 

What do you want done to these Officers?

[RichardR]

Exigent cirmcumstances have never been applied on an entire city before, let alone just random houses, at least not since 1776.

Our Constitutional protections are not null & void just because a bad person does some (granted very) bad things somewhere in the general area.

And no I didn't see the officers "asking permission" for anything, I saw them knock on homeowners doors, when it was answered, immediately reach in & snatch the homeowners with one hand, stick their sidearm in the homeowners faces and then jerk the homeowners outside, ordering them to then go to other awaiting officers to be individually searched while other officers searched inside of their homes.

What would I like to see happen to those officers? I'd like them to start asking people if "they'd like fries with that?" Because they certainly should not be law enforcement officers, at least not here in the United States of America.

[RobertNashville]

Exigent cirmcumstances have never been applied on an entire city before, let alone just random houses, at least not since 1776.

Our Constitutional protections are not null & void just because a bad person does some (granted very) bad things somewhere in the general area.

And no I didn't see the officers "asking permission" for anything, I saw them knock on homeowners doors, when it was answered, immediately reach in & snatch the homeowners with one hand, stick their sidearm in the homeowners faces and then jerk the homeowners outside, ordering them to then go to other awaiting officers to be individually searched while other officers searched inside of their homes.

What would I like to see happen to those officers? I'd like them to start asking people if "they'd like fries with that?" Because they certainly should not be law enforcement officers, at least not here in the United States of America.

Well, you can be as angry about rights being violated as you want...but so what?

 

It's up to the people who's rights were actually (allegedly) violated to do something about which seems to make DaveTN's question pertinent doesn't it???

 

What do you want done to these officers?

 

Have any of those people filed suit against the police/city/etc for violation of their rights (I haven't heard of any...have you)?

 

If these people's rights were violated and if they do nothing about it then they deserve the situation they have.

Edited June 17, 2013 by RobertNashville

[dats82]

I'm not calling for punishment or retribution, however, I do think people really need to look at these events and consider if that is really an acceptable course of action by the LEOs. I will tell you, if they knocked on my door and pull me out of my own home with a gun in my face, I would be causing a ruckus over it. I understand that some may consider the circumstances of the man hunt extreme or unique and that the actions of suspect were completely heinous, but that still does excuse the fact that threatened all if those residents with deadly force, entered there homes with force, and had absolutely nothing to show for it.

Again, I'm not calling for the punishment of the officers, but I do think this situation requires people to really think about how you you feel had you been in a similar circumstance. Knowing that you had done absolutely nothing wrong, had played no roll in the events, yet you end up with a gun stuck in your face while some dudes rumage through your shit. If you find these events acceptable, would you find it equaly acceptable if your house gets "swatted" while looking for a drug dealer in your neighborhood? Oh, and by the way, they had the wrong address.

[DaveTN]

 

I'm not calling for punishment or retribution, however, I do think people really need to look at these events and consider if that is really an acceptable course of action by the LEOs. I will tell you, if they knocked on my door and pull me out of my own home with a gun in my face, I would be causing a ruckus over it. I understand that some may consider the circumstances of the man hunt extreme or unique and that the actions of suspect were completely heinous, but that still does excuse the fact that threatened all if those residents with deadly force, entered there homes with force, and had absolutely nothing to show for it.

Again, I'm not calling for the punishment of the officers, but I do think this situation requires people to really think about how you you feel had you been in a similar circumstance. Knowing that you had done absolutely nothing wrong, had played no roll in the events, yet you end up with a gun stuck in your face while some dudes rumage through your ####. If you find these events acceptable, would you find it equaly acceptable if your house gets "swatted" while looking for a drug dealer in your neighborhood? Oh, and by the way, they had the wrong address.

You would certainly have the right to make a ruckus or file all the lawsuits you wanted. They would be heard in court and decisions made. But as I said before, for us to have an intelligent conversation about the issues we would need to know what happened at that door. Did the Officers ask for permission to search? I personally wouldn’t have pointed a rifle at these people while providing cover, but it’s not illegal. I have pointed a weapon a many people I have encountered on building searches or vehicle stops until I had determined who they were. It all depends on the circumstances.

Any time you have Police action that makes the news you will have people that think they were wrong and people that think they were right. I haven’t seen any complainant’s come forward yet; so there is no action to take or no “side” to get on. Do people get guns pointed at them when cops are pursuing suspects; all the time. You, just like these people; would have recourse.

What do you mean they had the “wrong” house? It was my understanding they were going door to door in the area he was last seen. Is that not what was happening?

This city took a tragic hit. The Police responded to extraordinary circumstances. If you are wondering if the same could happen in your neighborhood while they look for an active shooter that had just set off bombs and killed a bunch of people…. Yes, it’s possible it could. Edited June 17, 2013 by DaveTN

[dats82]

What I meant by the wrong address was if swat made a move on your house (looking for a dealer or something) and it turns out they had the wrong address, not referring specifically to the Boston mess. I would be pissed that they had the wrong address and ultimately put me and my family in danger not to mention the possibility of violation of rights and all that good stuff.

I was trying to draw the parallel of such a case to what happened in Boston but to a different scale. I get that you're a cop of some sort, so you probably see this all in a different light. You say it could happen in my neighborhood, and all I'm saying is that I don't think such actions should happen in any neighborhood. As I said before, the actions in question did not apprehend the suspect. Therefore, I think they were unnecessary, exposed too many people to risk, and should be examined to consider of such actions should be taken in the future. What was done, is done. All I'm saying is that there should be some strong questions raised as to how a similar scenario should be handled in the future.

[DaveTN]

 

What I meant by the wrong address was if swat made a move on your house (looking for a dealer or something) and it turns out they had the wrong address, not referring specifically to the Boston mess. I would be pissed that they had the wrong address and ultimately put me and my family in danger not to mention the possibility of violation of rights and all that good stuff.

I was trying to draw the parallel of such a case to what happened in Boston but to a different scale. I get that you're a cop of some sort, so you probably see this all in a different light. You say it could happen in my neighborhood, and all I'm saying is that I don't think such actions should happen in any neighborhood. As I said before, the actions in question did not apprehend the suspect. Therefore, I think they were unnecessary, exposed too many people to risk, and should be examined to consider of such actions should be taken in the future. What was done, is done. All I'm saying is that there should be some strong questions raised as to how a similar scenario should be handled in the future.

 I’m not a cop I’m a former cop, haven’t been one in many years; I just support them in the same way I support those that serve in the military. If they do something wrong I’m one of the first to offer suggestions to people that don’t think they have recourse.

It has happened; it happened here. The case in Lebanon where Officers had the wrong house and killed an old man when he pulled a gun. The surviving wife sued and won; but that doesn’t bring her husband back. I have long been a vocal opponent of Police Officers dressing in subdued “tactical” dress when serving these warrants. They are mistaken for home invaders because who they are is not immediately recognizable. Only one person is responsible for allowing it; the Chief or the Sherriff of the agency. It’s reckless.

However, that is not the case of what happened in Boston. Best I could tell they were making contact at the door and then entering. I don’t know if they were given permission or not. I don’t see any attorneys jumping on any civil rights violation cases; but they may be yet to come. If they do a court will rule based on the circumstances. The 4th amendment contains the word “unreasonable” for a reason. The courts will rule if what they did was reasonable.

[Dustbuster]

This bull#### again??????  Here you go: http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/62043-dhs-purchases-2700-light-armored-tanks/ and to save you some time (even though he went through and edited his article, the numbers haven't changed): http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/03/robert-farago/the-truth-about-the-dhs-mraps/

 

Its not 2700 vics. 

 

And it's not 1.6 Billion rounds of ammunition.  That was cleared up.  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/26/reps-challenge-dhs-ammo-buys-say-agency-using-1000-more-rounds-per-person-than/   1.3k-ish per person?  I laugh at that.  Sounds like a good weekend or a pistol course or two.  350 for the Army?  Sounds about right.....and thats ####ing embarrassing.  The only reason I'm able to shoot as much as I can is that I'm in Afghanistan.....and I'm still having trouble sourcing 9mm. 9mm in Garrison is even worse.

 

Who falls under DHS for this training/duty ammo?  CBP, ICE, Air Marshals, USSS, FLETC, Coast Guard, INS, etc.  There are a lot of agencies who need to train.  Don't cry foul when they ask for ammo .

 

Its also an IDIQ contract, not a purchase order. 

 

Also, this "retired" Captain....what's his deal?  I would love, love, love to read his OER's.  Just reading the last entry on his bio makes me wonder: http://combatsoldier.wordpress.com/about/  He was NOT in the 82nd.

Thank you,thank you, dom arrigato, kudos,gracias, anyone that thinks dhs could organize an EFFECTIVE  regime of suppression needs to stay on facebook, do a google search on katrina,look at the photos,and search you tube for "our gang" or "the little rascals" to get a glimpse of how things look when ran by "the agencies"...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YO6Ks77oYo4

Edited June 17, 2013 by Dustbuster