TheAgitator.com
Good Enough for Government Work
Wednesday, June 29th, 2011This story is actually from a couple years ago, but someone just uploaded the news clip to YouTube. It’s worth revisiting, if for no other reason than to watch the police chief compliment the “professionalism” of a SWAT team that shot up the wrong home—a home filled with six children. He then praised them for refusing to retreat when they came under fire . . . from an innocent man.
Listen closely to what the chief says at 1:29. “This is a perfect example of a situation that could have gone horribly wrong but did not because of the professionalism with which it was handled.” He failed to mention of course that it went horribly wrong for the family that they raided.
It could only have been through sheer incompetence that they failed to slaughter the innocent homeowner after he rightly opened fire on him.
Radley. I know you just started covering this sort of thing this morning, but c’mon – there are no innocent men. Unless they have badges on.
“He failed to mention of course that it went horribly wrong for the family that they raided.”
No, no, no. Horribly wrong would have been bodies littering the front lawn. Remember, cops are judged on a curve. Basically, as long as they didn’t take the worst case scenario, double down on it, and clog the toilet on their way out, a job well done.
I’m pretty sure this calls for medals for heroism and honor and courage or something.
What, no award for the brave citizen who defended his family and his home, at great personal risk, from a large force of armed, masked intruders?
Might I suggest the Annual Minnesota State Patrol “Meritorious Citizenship Award”.
Perhaps elected law enforce management is the answer. Elect a Police Chief for a set term and then allow the people to decide if they get to do it again.
This goes back to the pattern of the police honoring cops involved in wrong door situations to temper criticism of “decorated” police officers.
I love that (and by “love” I mean “want to kick puppies because”) the “professionalism” that prevented the situation from “going horribly wrong” was that nobody on the SWAT team could hit the person he was shooting at.
With intellects like this involved, it’s much like the Special Olympics…everybody’s a “winner.”
The whole thing kind of reminded me of this:
” `The race is over!’ and they all crowded round it, panting, and asking, `But who has won?’
This question the Dodo could not answer without a great deal of thought, and it sat for a long time with one finger pressed upon its forehead (the position in which you usually see Shakespeare, in the pictures of him), while the rest waited in silence. At last the Dodo said, `Everybody has won, and all must have prizes.’
`But who is to give the prizes?’ quite a chorus of voices asked.
`Why, she, of course,’ said the Dodo, pointing to Alice with one finger; and the whole party at once crowded round her, calling out in a confused way, `Prizes! Prizes!’
Alice had no idea what to do, and in despair she put her hand in her pocket, and pulled out a box of comfits, (luckily the salt water had not got into it), and handed them round as prizes. There was exactly one a-piece all round.
`But she must have a prize herself, you know,’ said the Mouse.
`Of course,’ the Dodo replied very gravely. `What else have you got in your pocket?’ he went on, turning to Alice.
`Only a thimble,’ said Alice sadly.
`Hand it over here,’ said the Dodo.
Then they all crowded round her once more, while the Dodo solemnly presented the thimble, saying `We beg your acceptance of this elegant thimble’; and, when it had finished this short speech, they all cheered.”
Justice Scalia: how’s that “new professionalism” working out for ya?
As I can’t post this question on PoliceOne.com, where the question would be deemed anti-police and moderated away, I’ll ask it here: why wouldn’t retreating have been the PREFERRED move? There was no report of a hostage inside.
So, why not retreat and then try to talk the person out? Shooting up a house risks the lives of other people in the house and neighbors when the bullets go flying though the walls. Why is this medal-worthy? Why isn’t it dangerous incompetence (separate from the incompetence of being at the wrong house). Maybe there is a plausible answer, but what is it?
One thing I find frustrating about these stories is the constant failure of police to explain why their tactics make any sense.
“It could’ve gone horribly wrong…”
Okay.
I am glad they didn’t hit the guy but that is some pretty bad shooting.
I don’t even practise much and if I shoot at you that many times you are dead many times over. Maybe that is because I do take just enough time to hit what I shoot at. Just bashing in and pop, pop, pop, pop,pop, and missing every time is not as effective as just one pop that hit on target.
A_Reader “As I can’t post this question on PoliceOne.com, where the question would be deemed anti-police and moderated away…”
Which is precisely why they are the way they are; because they insulate themselves from any and all constructive criticism and live in this echo chamber where they are shielded from any different opinions. It’s very unhealthy. It’s very like a dictator who surrounds himself with flatterers and loses all sense of reality. Soon he thinks he’s a god, kind of like cops.
Not one of those SWAT members was man enough to refuse the award.
They probably went home and showed off those medals to their kids.
The Minneapolis police have become nothing more than the most powerful gang in the city. They’re the “new mafia”, not the “new professionalism”.
They’d give Philly a run for it’s money in a corruption decathalon.
They gave a medal to the cop that shot an unarmed Hmong kid 8 times in the back while he was running away (and not suspected of any crime either, except for running.) Even after it was discovered that they planted a drop gun on the kid.
Oh and one more thing…..
Apparently Chief Dolan’s standard for getting a medal is “putting themselves in harm’s way, shot and and getting shot”.
By this logic, violent bank robbers should all receive heroism awards from the police chief. Not that there’s much difference between them and the SWAT team.
You know who else gets an award after screwing up an assignment this badly? Special Ed. Kids.
Cops and Special Ed. Kids…You can’t expect as much from them as you do everybody else, and if they screw up you give them an award just for trying. Mostly because you don’t want to deal with the temper tantrums.
#5:
“Perhaps elected law enforce management is the answer. Elect a Police Chief for a set term and then allow the people to decide if they get to do it again.”
Sheriff Joe Arpaio is elected.
“Sheriff Joe Arpaio is elected.”
Kinda shakes your faith in the electoral system doesn’t it?
Regarding their accuracy, I was reading on PoliceOne and several commenters talked about “Spray and Pray” being the preferred tactic. Of course, I couldn’t ask if this was official terminology or online jargon and whether or not that is an actual tactic but it summed up the man-on-the-street mindset.
[...] Good Enough for Government Work [...]
The Minneapolis SWAT team members were only awarded Silver medals, because the innocent homeowner protecting his wife, six children, and house actually lived through the SWAT assault and free-fire exercise.
People’s Republic of Vietnam Gold medals are awarded for killing Hmong children under the age of 12.
The North Vietnam Gold medal with Oakleave Cluster medal is awarded if you get multiple center-of-mass penetrations with only one shot, reflecting stringent economy of government resources.
A separate Pathet Lao bronze medal is awarded if the family pet is also killed, and then eaten at the celebratory feast.
#20 | Al V | June 29th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
“Sheriff Joe Arpaio is elected.”
Kinda shakes your faith in the electoral system doesn’t it?
[pretending that wasn't rhetorical]
What faith?
Yeah, it could have gone “horribly wrong” if the cops had actually hit anything with their wild reckless fire.
Cops are a fuckin’ species unto themselves. You can only cram that much ego into a person’s head if there is absolutely nothing else in there.
Sheriff Joe runs exactly like an elected cop would run: its all about the red meat and fear mongering. Plus, he threatens anyone who opposes him.
LOL! “the police investigator found the officers did no wrong” well, DUH there’s a surprise! I was harboring the fantasy that they would admit fault. and 2nd LOL “…how well the officers handled the raid on the wrong house” Well, as any military man knows, medals are like hemmroids; sooner or later every asshole gets one. And apparently any retard can get a badge.
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” — H. L. Mencken
I’m pleasantly surprised at the way the local news covers it. They covered it the way it should have been covered, which seems unusual.
For #11
“One thing I find frustrating about these stories is the constant failure of police to explain why their tactics make any sense.”
The existing Tactics Techniques and Procedures (TTP’s) strongly appear to be heavily focused on one thing and one thing only…Officer Safety. I get the sense that little if any credence is given to the safety of the suspects. The TTP’s seem to be designed to zero out any risk to the police and place all risk on the suspect if the suspect makes the smallest of a provocative move.
Given this, the police are making a fallacious assumption that all operational risk can be reduced to nil for them. Operational risk can be reduced but never completely negated. The tactical advantage the police seek in their “dynamic entry” (actually it should be called “violent entry”) does have weaknesses. The decision time loop is reduced which we have seen has caused needless death or one of these days, the police may have their tactics turned against them with reciprocal deadly consequences.
As I’ve stated in a previous post in another forum, the law of averages eventually catches up. Somewhere, sometime in the future, there’s going to be a SWAT team serving a warrant and the resulting carnage will be met with an horrendous backlash.
Juice “I’m pleasantly surprised at the way the local news covers it. They covered it the way it should have been covered, which seems unusual.”
Yea that’s a little mini trend I’ve noticed. Local news has always been notoriously ass kissing towards the state and it’s enforcers but I’m starting to see a little, not much but a glimmer at least, of this kind of reporting.
You mean furtive instead of provocative, so that a cop can say they perceived your micro movements as threatening and thus justified the hail of bullets. Or they can just like and say you did X because that method also works. Head I win, tails you lose.
I wish I could get awards for being bad at my job.
So if I’m a delivery man, I go to the wrong house, and give the person the wrong package, then get awarded Employee of the Month.
DocHoliday916 is exactly correct that police Tactics Techniques and Procedures transfer virtually ALL the risk of a police encounter over to the citizen “suspect”.
Imagine the contradictions in just a common SWAT raid scenario:
-Nighttime; the suspect (s)/ residents are probably sleeping.
-Dark uniforms are difficult to see.
-No Knock or, Knock and one Nanosecond later the door is hammered open.
-Deployment of offensive hand grenades a.k.a. “stun” grenades, which are intended to stun, blind, disorient and confuse the occupants of the residence.
-A dazed and confused occupant is thus awakened from a sound sleep by the sound of noise, breaking glass, and maybe explosions.
-Fearing the all-too-common home invasion, the resident arms himself.
-Before they realize that it the POLICE, he receives auditory input in the form of confusing and contradictory shouts: Freeze, Hands-Up, Don’t Move…..
-Police shout “gun”, and unleash a fussilade of bullets at the resident at the same moment.
-The Tucson former Marine was fired at 70 times in a matter of seconds, and hit at least 22 times, then left to bleed out for an hour before the police were brave enough to enter the house.
-Maybe the police are at the correct house, and encounter the correct suspect. And, Maybe they are NOT. They were not in Minneapolis……
“As I’ve stated in a previous post in another forum, the law of averages eventually catches up. Somewhere, sometime in the future, there’s going to be a SWAT team serving a warrant and the resulting carnage will be met with an horrendous backlash.”
Actually it’s already happened. The Branch Davidian Stand-off/ Massacre started as an ATF SWAT raid.
For #34
While I agree on the merits of your argument about Waco, the political factor for Koresh and his band of Davidians was not sufficient to merit a loud and sustained backlash. Rightly or wrongly, Koresh was portrayed as a religious head case and popular opinion did not convey a sympathy factor to the Davidians. I myself think Koresh was just a bit kooky but given the fact that the local Sheriff had advised the Feds that Koresh was known to walk about town, he could have been easily “collared” in a manner that was a bit more low key and of course not as sensational.
The event I’m talking about is the raid where the suspects are suburbia types, well known and liked in the neighborhood and active in the community and become “targets” based upon some very bad and hasty intelligence. The raid results in carnage. When the facts come out that the raid was executed on some very faulty assumptions with unacceptable results, then the massive push back begins and the community as a whole goes headhunting on the cops looking for both criminal charges and the leadership fired held accountable and subject to lawsuits. To say it can’t happen here, one might as well whistle past the graveyard of history.
I’d love to see a SWAT team bounce off a house one of these days. Standard SWAT entry tactics are designed to exploit known weaknesses in standard architecture. But there’s things you can do to reduce or negate those weaknesses.
Imagine the humor inherent to having a peaceful night’s sleep, waking up to a leisurely breakfast, and as you’re finishing your tasty meal, you turn on the morning news, and see a picture of your house surrounded by police cars, full of cops who are impotent to enter without permission.
Not all self-defense involves violence or weapons. You can put in some pretty potent passive defenses as well, if you take the time to think about it…
#36
Bergman, you’re on to something! It’d be comic relief to see the videotape of the Keystone Cops.
Bergman:
That would be billion hit viral comedy gold.
All you would need is a door with reinforcing dogs set into the wall. Totally Battering Ram proof.
Do you know how hard it would be for a typical SWAT guy loaded with his gear to break into a window? They’re not prepared to break into a window. In virtually every case, they bring one and only one entry mechanic to the party… a Battering Ram.
The second that fails, they know all the guys with AK-47s in the house will know they’re out there! Run!
The problem is, some departments use penetrators attached to their armored car… They don’t have to break down the door, they can rip the wall down.
There was no horrendous backlash in Waco. It was all one way violence initiated by government, and overwhelming spastic fire and lead rained down on people that didn’t prostrate before the government
The Waco massacre is an interesting example. My sense is that most people who heard of it accepted the narrative that more-or-less justified the BATF and FBI. But a smallish subset of people were utterly shocked and horrified by the whole clusterfuck, to the point that they still have deep suspicion of the “official story” w.r.t. SWAT raids, standoffs, and similar stuff.
I think this is fairly common. The same data can sometimes drive people with different starting beliefs further apart, based on how they interpret it.
For a good recap of the Waco incident, I’d recommend Kopel and Blackman’s “No More Wacos.” It not only evaluates the incident itself but the grotesque legal abuses before and afterwards.
http://www.davekopel.com/waco.htm