That last one even had me shaking my head..the kid sounded very polite all the way through it and the cop just sounded like he was having a very bad day. Of course, you may see one video like this, but you don't see videos of the hundreds of professional stops being made every day because quite frankly there's no story to tell there.

When I went through the LE Airtaser Instructor course, they pretty much proved to us that you should use the TASER before laying hands on the suspect in the hierarchy of force. The suspect and the officer are far less likely to be injured in the scuffle. There is little argument that the TASER has a tremendous deterrent effect, thanks to those well-televised images of screaming civilians. Personally, I would rather take the TASER shot than a full face shot of pepper spray, or worse yet, a PR-24 blow to my knee or elbow! Actual violence is so foreign to the public, who have been conditioned by TV and movies to think that it is much more sanitary than it really is, that the sight of real, contained and measured applications of force are not within their scope of understanding. In other words, they don't know what the hell they are talking about, but they don't like to see college kids scream like little girls...

Major Lord

You have to realize that we are coming from different environments.  The sheriff of the county just north of me was just indicted on multiple felony counts; the chief of police of the largest police department in my county is under investigation and will probably be indicted; not too long ago the sheriff of a county a couple of counties north of here was busted for protecting and participating in a major drug smuggling ring; and ten years ago one of the major newpapers published a survey that said by the year 2000 one out of every two adult males in the county would have a felony arrest record.  Maybe I should move back to Texas.

^Dont look now, but your proving the criminal justice system works.

Yes, this is way off topic, but while we're on the subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zQ0_d-BFM4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JULNrvIFz3Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOJ9_CApGfg

Quote from: Flying Pig on September 25, 2007, 06:03:34 PM
^Dont look now, but you're proving the criminal justice system works.

I don't exactly get your point, but every one of those felons came up through the ranks of everyday cops.  Maybe police forces should re screen every five years.  And maybe I should try to forget that I am encountering a school for scoundrels when I have routine interaction with Robert Peale's heirs.

The CJ system worked because it caught them and got them out of law enforcement. Perhaps you would prefer for them to be left in?

Quote from: floridacyclist on September 25, 2007, 06:38:00 PM
The CJ system worked because it caught them and got them out of law enforcement. Perhaps you would prefer for them to be left in?

No, I appreciate that.  It would have worked better if it had caught and eliminated them before they rose to the top. <severely biting tongue to avoid drawing an analogy to CAP>

Quote from: Skyray on September 25, 2007, 06:44:41 PM

Quote from: floridacyclist on September 25, 2007, 06:38:00 PM
The CJ system worked because it caught them and got them out of law enforcement. Perhaps you would prefer for them to be left in?

No, I appreciate that.  It would have worked better if it had caught and eliminated them before they rose to the top. <severely biting tongue to avoid drawing an analogy to CAP>

I wish I had your magic 8 ball.  I'd be Superman when it came to predicting who will commit a crime.

Of course, it's kind of hard to bust someone BEFORE they commit the crime...and unfortunately LE is one of those career fields that can be very corrupting to those who did not have a strong ethical code before joining up. Most of the crimes committed by cops would not have been committed if they had chosen a different job.

That said, most crimes committed by cops are going to be very newsworthy, their supervisor will find out (like maybe when they don't show back up for work) and they will lose their certification. In CAP, the person will just kind of fade away for a little while and as long as they don't let their membership run out for too long, they might get completely away with it.

On all of the examples that I  cited, and the one that I didn't cite, there were more than adequate indications that the individuals didn't play by the rules and in fact considered that the rules didn't apply to them.

I forget the context, but there was a poignant quote a while back: " Hasn't been indicted yet is not the standard, Mr. Secretary."

Quote from: Skyray on September 25, 2007, 07:15:38 PM
On all of the examples that I  cited, and the one that I didn't cite, there were more than adequate indications that the individuals didn't play by the rules and in fact considered that the rules didn't apply to them.

I forget the context, but there was a poignant quote a while back: " Hasn't been indicted yet is not the standard, Mr. Secretary."

No one case is exactly like another.  It's hard for us to comment on that without knowing those specific indicators.  If the right ones were there and applied to the right violations of law/policy/case law, etc., then I'd want to know why they weren't acted on too.

Once again, we are drifting off topic.

I appreciate that you think that a CAP member could cover up an encounter with the law, Gene.  With weekly meetings and a proactive leadership, I don't think it should be that easy.  On the other hand, with the lackadaisical attitude about attendance that many of us have, someone could serve a five year sentence and not be missed as long as they kept paying their dues.

I don't think that even putting them in patron status will help....since as far as I know, coming back in still won't require a background check if they were active before....but I may be wrong. On dialup here and not going to look it up in the dysfunctional Knowledgebase unless I have a need to.

I see no point in re-screening members on a regular basis unless we're going to have a more robust background check to begin with (an idea I could probably get behind).

 

What I don't understand is why Coast Guard Auxiliarists have to go through a PSI and submit a SF-86, while Air Force Auxiliarists only have to submit an FBI background check. 

Why should CAP personnel get a free pass, while Coast Guard Auxiliary personnel are required to submit personal information and pass a security check in order to participate?  In the Coast Guard Auxiliary, you must possess a high security clearance to participate in the air program and directly augment Coast Guard personnel.  In CAP, no security clearance is required to participate in flying activities or to work with military personnel.

Doesn't seem right to me.     

Quote from: &#9824;1 on September 26, 2007, 12:35:16 AM
What I don't understand is why Coast Guard Auxiliarists have to go through a PSI and submit a SF-86, while Air Force Auxiliarists only have to submit an FBI background check. 

Why should CAP personnel get a free pass, while Coast Guard Auxiliary personnel are required to submit personal information and pass a security check in order to participate?  In the Coast Guard Auxiliary, you must possess a high security clearance to participate in the air program and directly augment Coast Guard personnel.  In CAP, no security clearance is required to participate in flying activities or to work with military personnel.

Doesn't seem right to me.     

Coast Guard Auxiliary = REAL MILITARY AUXILIARY with real military missions

CIVIL AIR PATROL = PRETEND MILITARY AUXILIARY, that once was an Auxiliary, that will never be an Auxiliary again, with no real military support missions. 

Counterdrug in CAP is foolish at best.  We could be doing a whole lot more counterdrug wise, than is currently going on.  What do most Wings do?  Fly highbird missions in support of real counter drug National Guard Missions.

Lets get Congress to pass a law making CAP the OFFICIAL Full Time Air Force Auxiliary AGAIN!!!!!!

Folks: let me interject in this topic with some real world thoughts.  I am the director of the largest and probably most active Counter Drug Program in CAP.  I struggle daily with the administrative burden of trying to get and keep over 325 people screened for CD missions.  The entry level screening is now taking 12-14 months to be accomplished and rescreenings are taking 5-7 months and those are only averages.  I have one guy with the highest security clearances in the land who applied in July 06 and his screening is nowhere near being finished.  If you would like to see CAP come to a screeching halt, institute those sorts of screenings for all members.  While you are at it, have all cadets be screened through the LE system: you really will see a decline in membership.

The FBI fingerprint check is just that:  a simple check to see if the person has any record with the FBI and the National Criminal data base.  It will only find those really bad guys and they, typically, are not going to apply for membership in the CAP.

Think for a minute about your Admin or Personnel Officer having to bird dog Form 83s or some other unborn form for every person in your Squadron.  Then, as has been suggested, have that happen at four or five year periods.  My experience has shown that even the motivated people who apply for CD can't seem to fill out a simple, one page form correctly.  I am probably spending 10 hours a week just trying to keep forms filled out correctly.

It is a great idea, but is likely unworkable.  I spent most of my adult life with security clearances of the highest kind and I know what it takes to keep those things current.  Multiply that times 56,000 members and you have an administrative nightmare of severe proportions.

There has to be a better way.

Quote from: mikeylikey on September 26, 2007, 12:42:48 AM

Quote from: &#9824;1 on September 26, 2007, 12:35:16 AM
What I don't understand is why Coast Guard Auxiliarists have to go through a PSI and submit a SF-86, while Air Force Auxiliarists only have to submit an FBI background check. 

Why should CAP personnel get a free pass, while Coast Guard Auxiliary personnel are required to submit personal information and pass a security check in order to participate?  In the Coast Guard Auxiliary, you must possess a high security clearance to participate in the air program and directly augment Coast Guard personnel.  In CAP, no security clearance is required to participate in flying activities or to work with military personnel.

Doesn't seem right to me.     

Coast Guard Auxiliary = REAL MILITARY AUXILIARY with real military missions

CIVIL AIR PATROL = PRETEND MILITARY AUXILIARY, that once was an Auxiliary, that will never be an Auxiliary again, with no real military support missions. 

Counterdrug in CAP is foolish at best.  We could be doing a whole lot more counterdrug wise, than is currently going on.  What do most Wings do?  Fly highbird missions in support of real counter drug National Guard Missions.

Lets get Congress to pass a law making CAP the OFFICIAL Full Time Air Force Auxiliary AGAIN!!!!!!

:clap:   :clap:    :clap: