Medford Police: Being "Proactive"

[Just Jim]

Last month the IRS got their shotguns and now we have...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2468466/posts

I am sure they will all do the right thing with them lol

jim

 

[slideglider]

"Just an FYI to some posters... Socialism is an economic model and isnt synonymous with authoritarianism."


No, Socialism is an ideology. It's basically soft Communism. Economists don't write manifestos. If they do, they aren't economists.


It's funny how the event became divisive. You would think gun owners would rise up and say " if there was a threat, this proves there is a good reason for the public to be armed. For their own protection." Instead, it's an argument about who gets to do what to whom. It's an argument that gets settled at the end of a barrel.

 

[SSG]

This kind of thing happens all the time...

1- A neighbor that doesn't like you, calls children's services. They send two peeps to talk to your kids, and there really isn't anything you can do about it. Your neighbor is a rat. Let's hope your kids aren't.

2- A coworker calls the cops on you... especialy a govt agency, like Post Office, and they come talk to you. Your coworker is a Rat.

3- Wife says, you have been beating her, puts a restraining order on you, pretty much no cause or evidence needed...now your locked out of your house. Your wife the Rat.

4- Hurricane Katrina, looters all over...you standing there trying to protect your home...some Coast Guard guys roll up in a boat, they 'ask' for your guns....You neighbors the rats, who told them you have guns.

5 - I think it was Ohio..Swat team competition...visiting team had suburban broken into, MP5s and stuff, stolen...them and local police, went house to house in a search, no warrants, and got thier guns back. Neighbors, telling the cops, I think he has the guns...I mean how would they know where to look..rats.

6- Sitting on a grand jury, saw high school girls testify to being 'touched' 5 YEARS AGO, but not really sexually, but 'in appropriate' but can't remember when it really happened, and no one else will back here up..friends, family, mom, dad...ect...and some guy, without any chance to defend himself is looking at 10+ years, for 'touching'....totaly coached by the prosecuter... high school girl rats, coached by rat prosecutors...

7- Patriot Act: Warrantless searches, tapping email and phones, right from the offices...Nextell gives Law Enforcement a website to simply log in, put your cell phone number in, and can start listening and tracking your movements, in real time. 2 million requests on the website...only a fraction of that actualy had warrants. Rats on computers.

8- The military is the worst...no rights in there....saw two guys rat out a guy at Captain's Mast in the USMC, when the DIs were looking to hang a guy for trying to get out...he never talked to these guys. The worst kind of rats..liars, in a system working under the illusion of honor and integrity.


I have no illusion that we still like in a country with an actual bill of rights and a constitution.....

If you look at Nazi Germany, a little known fact...the only way they were able to round up all those jews, was because 'everyone' was trying to root them out of basements, and all sorts of hiding places...kids, moms, ect, were pointing fingers and helping SS find them...rats.

A govt can't work to abridge your rights, without rats....rats all over, rats everywhere....

 

[Gunner3456]

I say its totally uncalled for.

OK.

Taking someone to a psych ward against their wishes to be evaluated because he was upset about losing his job and bought some guns?

No, he agreed to go. You don't know the whole story. He had the option to get arrested. He was actually handled more than fairly.

Just an FYI to some posters... Socialism is an economic model and isnt synonymous with authoritarianism.

No, socialism is a type of government where the government owns the means of production (businesses.) Nazism on the other hand is where the private sector owns the businesses but the government controls them.

This is unconstitutional in my opinion, if he made threats then you arrest him and charge him accordingly, otherwise you have violated his rights. But to simply send a SWAT team to take him in for an evaluation based on being upset about being laid off buying guns?

You don't know what he did. I do. I'm appalled by how many people have an opinion but no knowledge. Must be nice to make up your own facts about what happened.

I cant believe some of you actually agree with this! Slowly but surely we are all getting used to the police state...

Again, if you knew what really happened - if you were dealing with any facts - your opinion might just hold some water.

This was a joint effort by the sheriffs' depts. of two counties, the Medford Police and the State Police. All had to approve it. They had the facts and you don't, but yet you know better than they. Must be nice.

You don't know their reasons but you seem to think they are all idiots and don't know the law or the constitution. You also seem to think they would all unanimously act without lawful cause.

Don't ever let a lack of facts slow you down.

None of the naysayers on here have any facts about the background of this event, but we sure have a lot of assumptions and resulting opinions.

Maybe we should just shut down all local LEO departments to keep everyone safe.

 

[soberups]

Lets look at one simple word here...intent.

The intent of the Medford PD was not to engage in some sinister, totalitarian government conspiracy to deprive this man of his civil rights and set a precedent for taking away all of our guns.

The intent of the Medford PD was to respond to some sort of allegation...the details of which are unknown to most of us...that a man with several weapons including an AK 47 was behaving in a threatening manner.

The intent of the Medford PD was to make sure that each officer who responded to the call was able to go home safely to their families rather than winding up as another casualty on the 6:00 news.

We dont know all the details and we dont have all the facts. But this was very clearly not a case of a bunch of jack-booted government thugs going door to door and hauling innocent gun owners away, despite what some of the more paranoid among us would like to think.

 

[Gunner3456]

Lets look at one simple word here...intent.

The intent of the Medford PD was not to engage in some sinister, totalitarian government conspiracy to deprive this man of his civil rights and set a precedent for taking away all of our guns.

The intent of the Medford PD was to respond to some sort of allegation...the details of which are unknown to most of us...that a man with several weapons including an AK 47 was behaving in a threatening manner.

The intent of the Medford PD was to make sure that each officer who responded to the call was able to go home safely to their families rather than winding up as another casualty on the 6:00 news.

We dont know all the details and we dont have all the facts. But this was very clearly not a case of a bunch of jack-booted government thugs going door to door and hauling innocent gun owners away, despite what some of the more paranoid among us would like to think.

Exactly correct. Now, let's not forget that this wasn't the MPD alone. This was a joint effort of the Jackson County Sheriffs' Dept, the Josephine County Sheriffs' Dept, the MPD, a couple of other city police depts who are part of the joint team, and the State Police.

This wasn't a knee-jerk, sudden action by a couple of wannabes. They had information, had the guy under surveillance for a couple of days, got their heads together, made a joint decision and acted on what they knew.

It isn't as if they do this to someone every day...

 

[Bigd6943]

So how much does the FBI ans state police watch this site? I have got a 2 guns in the last month SO!!!!! I have a good job I just like guns. I like to shoot and have fun with my son. I make $70,000 a year coach and play soccer take cair of a special needs child. When am I going to get my door kicked in. But then I would have a rite to defend myself RITE

 

[Ravenous]

Nobody got their door kicked in and a "rite" is a religious ceremony. There is more to the story than you know. These knee jerk reactions are borderline rediculous and hypocritical.

 

[Gunner3456]

So Don't start a sentence with a conjunction how much does the FBI ans S/B "and" state police watch this site? I have got Don't use "got" here. Just say "I have." a What's the "a" for?" 2 guns in the last month SO!!!!! Don't end a sentence with a conjunction. I have a good job That's a complete sentence and should end with a period. I just like guns. That is two sentences. "I have a good job." "I just like guns." I like to shoot and have fun with my son. Do you shoot at your son for fun? I make $70,000 a year Is that on your own printing press, or did you mean "I earn?" coach and play soccer take cair S/B "care." of a special needs child. That's a run-on, incomplete sentence. When am I going to get my door kicked in. That's an interrogative sentence and needs a question mark at the end. But Don't start a sentence with a preposition. then I would have a rite S/B "right." to defend myself RITE S/B "Right," and again it's interrogative and needs a question mark at the end.

Is there anything in this topic about the FBI or about doors getting kicked in? It's a little early for that crack pipe, don't you think?

 

[shibbershabber]

No, Socialism is an ideology. It's basically soft Communism. Economists don't write manifestos. If they do, they aren't economists.

Not trying to derail the thread... Socialism and Communism are different. Socialists didnt write a manifesto, the Communists did. Look at the difference between, say, Scandinavia and the USSR. Besides Socialism doesnt automatically mean authoritarianism, which is what previous posters were referring to.

Bringing in a SWAT team with APCs and assault rifles to "ask" someone to visit the psych ward against their wishes is AUTHORITARIAN!

Hannity and Limbaugh may call it socialism, but in reality, its Authoritarianism and police state tactics... and it is completely unacceptable in AMERICA!

 

[Bigd6943]

4 1 GUNNER I'm did you see the ' I am on my IPhone. Or would you like me to say eye phone? Just adding to the thred not asking for a for ; , '" ,' {}

All I was saying is that police FBI Feds are doing what ever they want. You can't (') even spank your kind without doing 5 to 10 in the pen. The police for one if you pass the test and your in. Do you have street smarts, can you shoot, do you have people skills?????? It does not mater as long as you can push start and WWW.COM. I looking after my family and me. I will defend them agenst friend or fow. That is my rite.

Spell check GUNNER

 

[chris61182]

No, he agreed to go. You don't know the whole story. He had the option to get arrested. He was actually handled more than fairly.

If as you say, you have insider knowledge that arrest was a real option on the table for the police and they offered him this as an alternative that's not just very good, that's awesome. Though it still seems odd that if they had reason to arrest and charge him that they didn't.

This was a joint effort by the sheriffs' depts. of two counties, the Medford Police and the State Police. All had to approve it. They had the facts and you don't, but yet you know better than they. Must be nice.

You don't know their reasons but you seem to think they are all idiots and don't know the law or the constitution. You also seem to think they would all unanimously act without lawful cause.

Funny, you seem to insist that might makes right. Didn't the FBI at Waco have approval and buy in from many of the surrounding agencies as well? Didn't they go so far as to lie to get some of that?

None of the naysayers on here have any facts about the background of this event, but we sure have a lot of assumptions and resulting opinions.

No we have only what was reported in the news and that is he was given a 'choice' to go for a 'voluntary' mental eval at gun point. Until it get's clarified by the agencies involved that's all we have and it's bad! Transparency is good, partial reporting is bad.

And if you'd rather pick apart my grammar, like you did with Bigd, instead of focusing on the issue feel free. I'm not very sensitive about my grammar so that sort of attack would be a waste of your time.

 

[Bigd6943]

Thanx for that Chris it's nice having backup lol. I guess I know what out of work school teachers do now ~

GUNNER
thanx (thanks)
4 (for)
U (you)
K (ok)
idk (I don't know)
tmro (tomarrow)
RU (are you)
dou che bag ( some ppl on NWFA )
ppl (people)

 

[supergenius]

Too many puppies

 

[Bigd6943]

.....

 

[Gunner3456]

-snip-

No we have only what was reported in the news and that is he was given a 'choice' to go for a 'voluntary' mental eval at gun point. Until it get's clarified by the agencies involved that's all we have and it's bad! Transparency is good, partial reporting is bad.

1. Personnel laws make it impossible for the paper to know or report why the guy was put on administrative leave or what else may have transpired with him which caused concern.

2. The Hipaa law makes it impossible to release any information about why he went to the hospital or what happened at the hospital. The hospital couldn't even state that he was a patient. Only the police could say he went there but not why, exactly.

3. Newspapers and other reporters often get some facts wrong, as you know. Even then, they had very little information and said so.

4. The amount of "transparency" in this case is controlled by the law.

Now, what amazes me is that we have so many "experts" here with absolutely no knowledge of what happened or why it happened, but still they have firm and negative opinions about it!

How wise is that?

I'll tell you again. The guy was treated very well and fairly under the circumstances. I do know what happened. I may be the only one here who does.

 

[Bigd6943]

Ok it's killing us gunner. Please fill us in so we can stop all this madness. I guess your the red M&M in a bag of blue

 

[chris61182]

1. Personnel laws make it impossible for the paper to know or report why the guy was put on administrative leave or what else may have transpired with him which caused concern.

2. The Hipaa law makes it impossible to release any information about why he went to the hospital or what happened at the hospital. The hospital couldn't even state that he was a patient. Only the police could say he went there but not why, exactly.

3. Newspapers and other reporters often get some facts wrong, as you know. Even then, they had very little information and said so.

4. The amount of "transparency" in this case is controlled by the law.

I'm not even sure any of those really come into play. Does the law control the transparency with regards to whether or not they could say that arrest was an option presented but that he chose treatment in place of it? It would seem like LE could give us plenty of info with out violating anyone's privacy.


Even tossing aside most of the rest of the news article we have two quotes from LEOs involved

"We had concerning information regarding a personnel issue and were watching the subject," Jackson County Sheriff Mike Winters said.

....

"Instead of being reactive, we took a proactive approach," OSP Sgt. Jeff Proulx said.

I can find absolutely nothing wrong with the first statement, that is LE doing their job and doing it well. The second one with out any clarification is troubling, LE and proactive are not a good mix. Now if he meant accommodating that would be different, and a better fit for the scenario you claim to have played out.

 

[Gunner3456]

I'm not even sure any of those really come into play. Does the law control the transparency with regards to whether or not they could say that arrest was an option presented but that he chose treatment in place of it? It would seem like LE could give us plenty of info with out violating anyone's privacy.


Even tossing aside most of the rest of the news article we have two quotes from LEOs involved



I can find absolutely nothing wrong with the first statement, that is LE doing their job and doing it well. The second one with out any clarification is troubling, LE and proactive are not a good mix. Now if he meant accommodating that would be different, and a better fit for the scenario you claim to have played out.

You just won't give it up for some reason. You don't have a clue what they knew, and you don't have a clue what happened or why it happened and yet you hold strongly to your uninformed "opinions."

I certainly am gaining some information about some individuals here, that's for sure.

 

[Gunner3456]

Ok it's killing us gunner. Please fill us in so we can stop all this madness. I guess your the red M&M in a bag of blue

I have a little piece of news for you. It's none of your business.

My only point is that I know, and I approve. I believe you would too.