My apologies. I am trying to counter 6-8 months of not drinking..... by drinking.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
How high is this ATF scandle going to go?
- Thread starter Bevo16
- Start date
My apologies. I am trying to counter 6-8 months of not drinking..... by drinking.
Maybe you're just a better American than I am, but I have a distinct uneasiness associated with a bunch of goons from the Department of (re)Education busting down my door. Why do they need federal agents; isn't the FBI a perfectly legal way to investigate these crimes? You would be wrong if you assumed they didn't have a SWAT team. The guys rolled into his house in the middle of the night decked out in black batman gear. They may not expressly call themselves SWAT, but FBI's HRT doesn't call themselves SWAT, either, and they were the genesis for all the local yokel barney fifes getting the idea of tacticooling their departments up.
Those federal agents are lucky to be alive. A no knock warrant on the wrong house can have tragic consequences, and is a good way for an innocent person to end up in the big house for 10 years. The courts have ruled you have no right to defend yourself against an unannounced police invasion; you've got to figure out pretty quick whether the ass clowns in your house screaming to get down without identifying themselves are police or criminals. Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6 has scary implications when it comes to these kind of police "tactics." I'd rather see a court actually look at the Constitution and say "no, this document says we can't use unlawful (ie illegal) force to see if you are doing anything illegal," but that's not going to happen anytime soon in the day and age of exponentially expanding government power.
All of this is in the guise of protecting the officers serving the warrants. Sorry, but my thoughts have always been that the police protect the innocent; they don't invade their homes in the dark of night and point guns at them. Police take an oath to protect the very people these warrants endanger. You want to serve a warrant, you do it the right way by announcing your presence in daylight. Anything else is jackboot goon bullshit.
When you see the shitty way that this ATF operation was executed, the brazen political motives behind it, and the dishonest way the State Department interprets statistics, our "high ground" over Mexico on these issues gets a little shaky.
Don't know much about federal law enforcement, do you? There are quite a few federal agencies involved in law enforcement from the FBI to the Secret Service, Postal Inspectors to CGIS, the Pentagon Force Protection Agency to US Marshals and many IG folks including DoEd. All have their own role and help enforce federal laws, usually ones relevant to their specific area of expertise with the FBI being the most equal among them. Do some overlap? Sure, but the system works pretty well most of the time.
As for your assertion that the DoEd folks may have been SWAT in everything but name, do you realize that regular federal agents and police officers serve such warrants all the time with no special tools or weapons and lacking all the tacti-cool gear often associated with SWAT or similar police units? Other than the claims of the homeowner, how do you know if they were in 'batman' gear? They could have been just wearing vests and dark blue windbreakers with yellow lettering as feds are wont to do.
If there was something unconstitutional about such warrants they wouldn't be conducted but yet they continue to be and for very good reason, they work. As I already noted they can be abused and sometimes lead to tragic results, but for the number conducted tragedy is pretty rare on either end. You might not like it that much personally but they are legal and police use them effectively.
The very arguments before the judge who decided they were legal used the phrase "otherwise unlawful force" to describe the no knock entry techniques. Maybe I'm just retarded, but unlawful usually means illegal to me.
Oh wait. It's obviously not illegal if the government can do it. I forgot. A judge somewhere (because they have never been found to be corrupt) decided the system counts extra for some, but not for others. Got ya.
Remember that slippery slope people complain about? How it starts with nudey patdowns by McSecurity Guards at the airports, and dudes reading your naughty emails because you might be a terrorist? It ends with federal Agents coming into your house without announcing their presence, at night, with an incomplete warrant, looking for the wrong person with guns pointed at you and your family. Good luck with that.
What would it take before you would call it a police state?
Unconstitutional SHIT happens ALL THE TIME. ALL THE TIME. And it doesn't get addressed until it goes to court because someone fought it. Look at the DC gun ban. That was in effect for years... and surprise surprise it was found to be unconstitutional.
The final authority for constitutional / unconstitutional rests in the hands of the SCOTS, and even then sometimes they overturn cases. The above was a poor argument.
Show me where 'no knock' warrants have been found unconstitutional. Oh wait, they haven't, even when the rules on a 'knock and announce' were violated.
Just because you don't believe something is unconstitutional doesn't make it so as Statesman pointed out, SCOTUS has the final word.
Oh, and the question on a 'police state', give me a break. Get back to me when you have lived in an actual 'police state', a whole different world than the good 'ol USA.
navyao
Registered User
This is a topic which I have a little bit of experience with...Having executed both knock and no-knock search warrants, those operations are executed by Tactical Units. However, "we" i.e. the Tactical Unit or SWAT execute these warrants based on other people's cases. The "dicks" usually ascertain the search warrant based on a case they've put together. The investigating officer or detective then goes to the district attorney who will approve or disapprove the request for the warrant upon finding probable cause. A judge then signs off on it and he/she decides weather or not it will be a knock or no-knock.
I was team lead in a no-knock search warrant last week, it involved three males who were involved in an armed robbery, armed with a gun. The judge said no to the no-knock. I've been on drug search warrants where there was no mention of firearms being involved and we were authorized to execute a no-knock. That being said I'll remind all of you that we too follow ROE, we don't have bling discretion and go and knock down every Tom, Dick and Harry's door just because. Walk in my boots once and you'll formulate an opinion that the Constitution is more favorable to the shit heads then for LE. Liberal judges and DA's are too concerned about case law and what the media will think about them rather than protecting us.
I was team lead in a no-knock search warrant last week, it involved three males who were involved in an armed robbery, armed with a gun. The judge said no to the no-knock. I've been on drug search warrants where there was no mention of firearms being involved and we were authorized to execute a no-knock. That being said I'll remind all of you that we too follow ROE, we don't have bling discretion and go and knock down every Tom, Dick and Harry's door just because. Walk in my boots once and you'll formulate an opinion that the Constitution is more favorable to the shit heads then for LE. Liberal judges and DA's are too concerned about case law and what the media will think about them rather than protecting us.
Not to be disrespectful, because I dont mingle with the riff raff like you do navyao, but the Constitution was designed to be more protecting of the People rather than the state.
It sucks because at the end of the day the person knocking down doors and getting shot at is a LE officer who is doing his job as he sees fit. And I dont think the intent of the Constitution was to protect criminals as much as it was to ensure that we are actually getting criminals and not innocent people. But at the end of the day I would rather see a few shit heads go free than condemn and innocent man.
It sucks because at the end of the day the person knocking down doors and getting shot at is a LE officer who is doing his job as he sees fit. And I dont think the intent of the Constitution was to protect criminals as much as it was to ensure that we are actually getting criminals and not innocent people. But at the end of the day I would rather see a few shit heads go free than condemn and innocent man.
Sapper!
Excuse the BS...
just got up and looked at the news.
it's the main article right next to the NH debate
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/06/14/mexico.guns/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
I hate you CNN.....
it's the main article right next to the NH debate
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/06/14/mexico.guns/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
I hate you CNN.....
I wrote all of my representatives in DC about this issue yesterday, and recieved the following from Senator KBH,
Dear Friend:
Thank you for contacting me regarding Project Gunrunner. I welcome your thoughts and comments.
Project Gunrunner is a Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) initiative that seeks to disrupt the illegal flow of guns from the United States to Mexico. There are five main objectives for Project Gunrunner: (1) to investigate individuals responsible for illicit firearms trafficking along the Southwest border; (2) to coordinate with U.S. and Mexican law enforcement along the border on firearms cases and violent crime; (3) to train U.S. and Mexican law enforcement officials to identify firearms traffickers; (4) to provide outreach education to gun dealers; and (5) to trace all firearms to identify firearms traffickers, trends, patterns and networks.
During a March 10, 2011, Department of Justice (DOJ) Appropriations hearing, I questioned Attorney General Eric Holder about disturbing reports that officials at DOJ and the ATF knowingly allowed weapons to be smuggled into Mexico from the United States. Some of these weapons were possibly used in the killings of an Immigrations Customs Enforcement agent in Mexico and a Border Patrol agent in Arizona. In responding to my questions, the Attorney General acknowledged the seriousness of the situation by asserting, “It is true that there have been concerns expressed by ATF agents about the way in which this operation was conducted, and on that I took those allegations, those concerns, very seriously and asked the [U.S. Justice Department] Inspector General to try to get to the bottom of it. An investigation, an inquiry is now under way.”
I put Attorney General Holder on notice that I have serious concerns about how Project Gunrunner is being carried out, especially considering the possible link to the killing of two U.S. law enforcement agents. I look forward to reviewing the result of the Justice Department’s internal investigation and subsequently deciding what, if any, action should be taken.
I appreciate hearing from you, and I hope that you will not hesitate to contact me on any issue that is important to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5922 (tel)
202-224-0776 (fax)
http://hutchison.senate.gov
Dear Friend:
Thank you for contacting me regarding Project Gunrunner. I welcome your thoughts and comments.
Project Gunrunner is a Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) initiative that seeks to disrupt the illegal flow of guns from the United States to Mexico. There are five main objectives for Project Gunrunner: (1) to investigate individuals responsible for illicit firearms trafficking along the Southwest border; (2) to coordinate with U.S. and Mexican law enforcement along the border on firearms cases and violent crime; (3) to train U.S. and Mexican law enforcement officials to identify firearms traffickers; (4) to provide outreach education to gun dealers; and (5) to trace all firearms to identify firearms traffickers, trends, patterns and networks.
During a March 10, 2011, Department of Justice (DOJ) Appropriations hearing, I questioned Attorney General Eric Holder about disturbing reports that officials at DOJ and the ATF knowingly allowed weapons to be smuggled into Mexico from the United States. Some of these weapons were possibly used in the killings of an Immigrations Customs Enforcement agent in Mexico and a Border Patrol agent in Arizona. In responding to my questions, the Attorney General acknowledged the seriousness of the situation by asserting, “It is true that there have been concerns expressed by ATF agents about the way in which this operation was conducted, and on that I took those allegations, those concerns, very seriously and asked the [U.S. Justice Department] Inspector General to try to get to the bottom of it. An investigation, an inquiry is now under way.”
I put Attorney General Holder on notice that I have serious concerns about how Project Gunrunner is being carried out, especially considering the possible link to the killing of two U.S. law enforcement agents. I look forward to reviewing the result of the Justice Department’s internal investigation and subsequently deciding what, if any, action should be taken.
I appreciate hearing from you, and I hope that you will not hesitate to contact me on any issue that is important to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5922 (tel)
202-224-0776 (fax)
http://hutchison.senate.gov
Sapper!
Excuse the BS...
Looks like the same concerns are finally making it up to the hill. I just have a hatred about how the left was trying to use this to get legislation going a year ago after some of the "results" were known to members of congress. At least it IS going to get a little big of exposure, that is until one of the Kardashians have a sex tape come out, then it will go right back to the bottom of the news unfortunately.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/15/us.fast.and.furious/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/15/us.fast.and.furious/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
gaijin6423
Ask me about ninjas!
Bevo, that reply beats the hell out of all the responses I've received from my NC state and federal representation, combined. I even received a response from one of my state reps that told me to pound sand, because he was busy working hard for more entitlements, and that he could care less about gun rights. (Well, more or less that's what the response said anyway.)
So much for that whole, "Buy the people, for the people," thing I guess.
So much for that whole, "Buy the people, for the people," thing I guess.
navyao
Registered User
No disrespect taken statesman, just thought I'd chime in, give you fellas a different perspective. We're all on the same page; language, borders and culture and if we don't elect the right representatives all of that will continue to slowly disappear. I cringe at what I see happening in the southwest. My opinion is close the bases in Germany and put those Soldiers on the U.S. Mexican border...
Regarding the Constitution I agree with you as well. My point was more of a shot at liberal judges who abuse and have way too much discretion. I have to follow (just like you guys) a helluva lot of rules, regs, policy, laws, etc. You'd be amazed at the detail that goes into one of my incident reports, especially if it's to ascertain a search warrant. Then it goes in front of the judge and the no-knock is shot down and without giving a reason other that being told, "This judge never authorizes no-knocks." F-that!
So to the post-e who called the U.S. a "police state" I must strongly disagree! If it were, I could stop you for no reason, I could pull you over driving your car for no reason and if I knocked on your door and you had a felony warrant and you refuse to answer - I'd bust down your door and arrest you. Without a search warrant I can't arrest you until you walk out of that house. Trust me, I've wanted to do that, I've dealt with some very, very bad people who deserved to get their 6 dragged out of their hole and have the piss beat out of them. But of course I didn't do that, I need my job.
Not to side track this topic at all but if you guys have a chance and maybe you've heard of them do a search for "soverign citizens," another group of crazies we're dealing with!
Regarding the Constitution I agree with you as well. My point was more of a shot at liberal judges who abuse and have way too much discretion. I have to follow (just like you guys) a helluva lot of rules, regs, policy, laws, etc. You'd be amazed at the detail that goes into one of my incident reports, especially if it's to ascertain a search warrant. Then it goes in front of the judge and the no-knock is shot down and without giving a reason other that being told, "This judge never authorizes no-knocks." F-that!
So to the post-e who called the U.S. a "police state" I must strongly disagree! If it were, I could stop you for no reason, I could pull you over driving your car for no reason and if I knocked on your door and you had a felony warrant and you refuse to answer - I'd bust down your door and arrest you. Without a search warrant I can't arrest you until you walk out of that house. Trust me, I've wanted to do that, I've dealt with some very, very bad people who deserved to get their 6 dragged out of their hole and have the piss beat out of them. But of course I didn't do that, I need my job.
Not to side track this topic at all but if you guys have a chance and maybe you've heard of them do a search for "soverign citizens," another group of crazies we're dealing with!