Home
- Details
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
From time to time, someone who used to be a Marine will loudly announce that they used to be a Marine, and then proceed to lecture you on why that credential is somehow impressive.
In this case, it was a thread under this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA 
He then proceeded to tell us how being a Mareen Muhrean Mar...grunt, made him an expert on this.
I pointed out that having been a Marine, of itself, gave no credibility.
He replied with:
|   |     |
| ||
  |   |   | ||
Michael being a Marine has everything to do with anything warfare. We are the tip of the spear of the greatest war machine that has ever existed....So go back to your keyboard there warrior.....and don't say sorry, it makes you look like a little bitch. Side note, we have the technology to make our guys superpowers bulletproof cyborgs yet we still fight with weapons that existed in Vietnam 50 years. You think there would be funding for ground troops to guard against every high tech gadget when they are first released. Think of the introduction of machine guns in world war 1 trench warfare. They killed battalions of men carving them into the wall of round....asshole. | ||||
~~~
Well, wasn't that special.
It's fake. But even if it was real, let's explain how this goes down:
THEM: "Facial recognition."
US: "All troops will now wear masks or paint their faces in geometric camo."
US: "Develop a counter drone and ECM."
US: "Hack that sucker and bring them down."
US: "Now send them back to source. Aim every one of those motherfuckers at the president of that country. I want him e-fucked to death by an orgy of a million drones."
In the meantime, if only there were some gadget our troops could wear on their heads that would slow or stop a 3 gram charge. Something made of kevlar or carbon fiber and fitted to the shape of the head...possibly with something over the eyes, so the standoff distance was too great for such a charge.
And if only there were something we could deploy that would trap those little rascals. Something made of some kind of loosely woven cloth, that we might call a "mesh."
Now onto the rest of Former Marine Boy's post: 
The machine gun is a lot older than 100 years or WWI.  And the fact that a single French general was a retard does not change the fact that both sides had the weapon, and matched others, and therefore were at a standstill for years.
As far as "The same weapons as 50 years ago," I haven't seen any F4s, M60 MBTs, or even any M60 machine guns lately.  Though it's true:  We still use aircraft, tanks and machine guns, just like we did in WWI.
The important thing here is that being a "Former Marine" is irrelevant to anything that wasn't in that Marine's MOS or duty experience.  He may know certain other things AS AN INDIVIDUAL, but being a "former Marine" has nothing to do with it.  It's a ludicrous authority to appeal to. Certainly, there are former Marines who are geniuses. Others are borderline retards. Some have served with great distinction. Others were cowards or deranged assassins.
Since Gene doesn't state he was either an RPV operator, an intel or threat analysis expert, or a War College graduate with relevant research experience, his actual experience (and since he doesn't say "Rifleman," I'm going to guess clerk or supply) means dick.
And as a currently best selling SF author, I can assure you of that.
- Details
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
As everyone knows by now, Mesa PD engaged in a game of "Simon Says" combined with "Twister" involving short barreled rifles with a completely innocent citizen, and blew him away when he wiggled wrong.
I'd like to address some obvious failures in the procedure the department devised.
EDIT: And first, why did they assume a report of "Man with a rifle aiming it" was 100% accurate? The person could be mistaken as to if it was a gun, if it was being pointed, and it assumes pure intent on their part, not intent to have someone shaken down because the caller doesn't like guns.  And people have previously died under those conditions. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_John_Crawford_III
Now, every competent cop on the planet, most veterans with training in house clearing, and anyone with a brain knows that you want to detain and control a suspect quickly. The longer a dance goes on, the more the risk of something happening to someone.
Ideally, you have the suspect prone out, cover him will someone else cuffs him, then search for weapons.  You can also have him lean against a wall or car. A competent officer can even do it alone. It's certainly safer if you have two or more.  One covers, one restrains.
Mesa came up with some bizarre dance where the suspect lies prone, hands on head, crosses his legs, kneels up, gets shouted at for using his hands, puts his hands straight up in the air, is told to keep them there while somehow crawling, then gets his brains blown out. This process takes five minutes and endangers bystanders. 
What would have happened if someone else came out of a hotel room or around the corner of the corridor? What would have happened if those fired rounds had penetrated thin hotel walls and killed someone else?
The answer, of course, is that Mitch the Bitch Brailsford would have walked away from two or more murders, not just one.
So, Option One, as discussed:  One officer covers, one approaches, cuffs, then searches. There are finer points to this, but that's the basics.
Option Two: If you are really terrified of this subject, you have him remain motionless while the second officers (and they had six) takes a wide arc around. In a hotel hallway, you could even have one or more officers go down a floor, up another stairwell, and approach from behind.  Problem solved.
There's two failures of training or ability for a simple procedure that is done literally thousands of times per day.
Failures in the order process:  I heard a statement that the changing positions are deliberately designed to keep the subject confused.  That's wrong.
What if the subject is of low intellect?
What if he is intoxicated?
What if he is hard of hearing?
What if he was just clocked in the head in whatever engagement you are responding to, and is not cognizant?
What if he is mentally ill?
What if he's just terrified of weapons pointed at him and unable to track other matters?
Well, I guess nothing, if your intent is to find a reason to murder someone.
Now, what if the subject has an injured or incapacitated arm and can't raise his hand into one of these positions?
I guess you have another reason to make his children orphans.
Then you want him to cross legs, then somehow kneel.
Fun fact: There are a lot of people who can't kneel. Bad knees, bad ankles, poor balance.
Once again you get to make a brain salad.
Then you want them to crawl, with an implication to keep their hands above their head (it was never stated he should move his hands after he was told to "keep them there or we will kill you") that is not stated.  This is an impossible command to follow. As stated, it's impossible. As implied, it's not as stated.
I can deduce exactly how this entire idiotic procedure came about. They probably rehearsed it. They had someone play the subject, talked them through the process, and determined it was feasible.
The problems would be: That actor did not have loaded rifles pointed at their head.
That actor would be quickly familiar with the routine after seeing it or rehearsing it.
That actor was probably another cop, physically fit, well-rested, and not confused, terrified or hindered in any way that would complicate matters.
This is a legitimate example of "privilege." The rehearsal involved fit, aware, competent individuals with no hindrances given to them by nature or the situation.
When you put an actual victim in there, intoxicated, terrified, innocent, who realizes his pants are slipping down and, per our cultural mores, tries to correct that moral problem, it means he moves in a way that poor little Mitch the Bitch, armored, armed, with his custom "You're Fucked" rifle and his awesome tattoos, just itching to blow someone away, gets his lifelong ambition. And gets to claim that he and his five buddies were just terrified to death of this prone guy in shorts.
Then the pig, the department and the city get to shrug and say, "Well, it works perfectly in simulation. We don't know what went wrong here. Good police work, though."
My analysis of this bizarre dance is that it was deliberately designed to offer the maximum opportunity for incompetence, error and murder.
And no one with any sense of self preservation should ever enter the city limits of Mesa. You have better odds in Vegas. Mesa doesn't have a police department. They have a murder squad.
- Details
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
We asked several police officers nationwide how to handle interactions with law enforcement. These were their responses:
 
The birthday party down the street is a little noisy. What should I do?
Call us and we'll shoot the dog. That will quiet the little punks down. 
~~~
What if I have a service dog?
No problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1O9GmUcp0Mo
~~~
You shot my dog! Now what?
You need to saw its head off so we can test it for rabies. Or else you go to jail.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article188099994.html
~~~
I think my friend is suicidal.
We can fix that problem for him.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/12/05/oklahoma-city-officer-charged-in-fatal-shooting-man.html
~~~
That's really not a good fix.
Well, there are other options.  We can try to cheer him up.
http://www.kansascity.com/latest-news/article206165144.html 
~~~
I see a kid in the park with what might be a toy gun.
No problem. We've got this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_Rice
~~~
I saw a guy near the gun counter of WalMart with a gun. What should I do?
Call us and we'll shoot him on sight.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_John_Crawford_III
~~~
I possibly saw a gun through a hotel window, even though that's legal in this state.
We've got a procedure for that. Our swat team will make him do the hokey pokey then shoot him.
~~~
My neighbor is deaf, is that going to be a problem?
No, the bullets will kill him just as easily.
~~~
If I'm helping a disabled person and the cops arrive, what should I do?
Seriously, we have no idea either. We'll probably open fire.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442.html
~~~
If a disabled, mentally ill person needs help, what should I do?
Call us, of course. That's an easy one.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/23/us/texas-amputee-shooting/index.html
~~~
Seriously?  You'd shoot me?
Well, not always.
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/investigations/article205363229.html 
~~~
I'm not the mentally ill person you're looking for.  I'm not sure why you're here.
Our expert says you're mentally ill. We don't need to see your identification. We're going to forcibly medicate you now. But you'll get a free steak dinner.
~~~
We think a teenager may have taken explicit photos of himself. What should we do?
Call us and we'll send a child molester to make definitely sure there's video of him.
http://reason.com/blog/2017/12/07/4th-circuit-says-forcing-a-teenager-to-m
~~~
What if I have no legal problem and call outside for first aid?
We'll shoot at your dog, miss and hit your daughter instead.
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/780k-settlement-cop-shoots-4yo-daughter/ 
~~~
Is it proper to produce my wallet and ID when confronted by police?
It certainly helps us with paperwork.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Amadou_Diallo
~~~
You're good at identifying the right target, I hope.
Sure.  Of course, if you're a small Asian woman we might mistake you for a large black man. But don't worry, we'll have some charity replace your truck after we shoot it full of holes.  Totally not our fault.  Stress of the moment, you all look alike to us.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Dorner_shootings_and_manhunt
~~~
If I have drugs, you'll be careful about my family, I hope.
Suuuure.
~~~
I make every effort to abide by the law, including asking for police inspections.  I assume I'm good.
Maybe. Got anything interesting? Or sellable?
~~~
We don't sell drugs.  We should be fine, right?
Our paid stooge says you sell drugs. Your baby has it coming.
~~~
Really, I don't sell drugs.
What do you mean you don't sell drugs?  Our experts know better.
~~~
What's the procedure if you do think I have drugs?
A scientific search.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/26/opinion/sunday/kristof-3-enemas-later-still-no-drugs.html
~~~
What should I do if you conduct a sting on my premises? Do you need help?
No, we're going to seize your property for the crime we pretended to commit.
~~~
So I should follow all instructions and everything will go fine.
Yup. Perfectly fine. It makes it much easier.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-officer-shot-unarmed-black-man-20170402-story.html
~~~
If you realize you have the wrong house, will I be okay?
Mmmmmaybe......not.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/georgia-police-shoot-homeowner-responding-wrong-home/story?id=39723930
~~~
If I'm 92 years old, and you have the wrong house, what happens?
Oh, we'll make it the right house. We'll fire 39 shots at you and hit you with about 6. Then we'll shoot each other.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathryn_Johnston_shooting
~~~
What?  You don't shoot each other often, do you?
Well, accidents happen.
~~~
If I wind up getting shot, you'll administer first aid, yes?
Why would we do that?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Deandre_Brunston
~~~
If I'm stopped for a traffic violation, should I tell you I'm legally carrying a weapon?
If you like.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Philando_Castile
~~~
What if I'm sitting in my car unarmed?
We'll break the window, drag you out, and put a bullet in your brain, for "officer safety." 
~~~
Look, you don't just shoot everyone you encounter, do you?
Nah, we also have dogs.
~~~
So it's safe for me to call for help if I see a problem, then.
Define "safe."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Justine_Damond
~~~
What if I'm minding my own business?
Yeah, right. You're probably a prostitute and deserve a groping and a beating.
I'm afraid to ask, but if a child were lost, you wouldn't shoot them, would you?
The child? No.
~~~
So children are safe during procedural processes?
Um...well...
~~~
So it would actually be best if I were naked, then?
Why would that matter?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Anthony_Hill
~~~
What if I meet you off duty? Say at a social function for pets?
I'll probably shoot your dog.
http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/37122662/off-duty-officer-shoots-dog-at-shelby-farms-park 
~~~
You have really good aim with dogs. Sheesh.
Usually, but not always.
~~~
What if a small girl is chasing her puppy?
We'll teach her some manners.
~~~
What about other social events?
That depends on if you accept our offer of a drink.
~~~
What kind of training do you have for this job?
The best training in the world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzHEOSyMqug
~~~
That's rare, though, right? I shouldn't be in danger.
Probably not.  But accidents happen.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/14/raid-of-the-day-eurie-sta_n_3273127.html
~~~
I'd like to observe this training for myself, to see just what's involved.
You might not wanna do that.
~~~
If there's a camera rolling and you know it's being filmed, you'll use discretion, yes? You won't empty your guns at a running bad guy and hit the cameraman?
Who cares? There's nothing wrong with that.  The judge concurs.
~~~
Right, but it's not policy to roll up and blow people away, is it?
Well....about that....
~~~
So if I see you roll up to get someone, what should I do?
Duck.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/25/nypd-shooting-bystander-victims-hit-by-police-gunfire.html
~~~
If I'm detained, should I come quietly?
Quiet, screaming, actually, it doesn't matter if you come, as long as we do.
https://nypost.com/2017/12/08/woman-claims-nypd-detectives-discussed-taking-turns-raping-her/
~~~
Do I have right to remain silent?
That depends. Do you like rough sex?
- Details
- Written by Michael Z Williamson
As usual, I shouldn't need a disclaimer, but people are stupid.
I support the cops, WHEN THEY ARE IN THE RIGHT.  This includes shootings that outrage a lot of people. Mike Brown, for example.  Good shoot. Punk had it coming.
So let's look at this one and detail why Philip Brailsford is a retard, a sociopath, and deserving of the worst fate imaginable.
Video here:  https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/939014159726870530 (Note that I don't like this reporter. In this case, though, he's got the source info.)
Now, here's the pig in question.  Looks like some hyped up CoD player trying to be a badass:
The press, btw, chose to edit the photos not to show the tattoos.
"The judge did not allow jurors to hear about an etching on the dust cover of the rifle Brailsford used to shoot Shaver, which said  "You're f--ked," because he felt it was prejudicial."
It should be prejudicial. If you or I had that dustcover on a rifle, it would be considered provocative.  And note, he modified his issued duty weapon with this. That takes tools, it's not just a drop in, and is against department policy. Only the armorer gets to modify weapons. EDIT: apparently his personal weapon, which is supposed to meet specific department standards. Since they cited the dust cover as part of the reason for his firing, clearly that wasn't within standards.
This is a dickless little pussy, trying to look like a badass, with a hardon for shooting someone.
Now, watch the video above.  What should have happened:
Suspect lies down.  Officer gets good clear field of fire. Second officer approaches and cuffs suspect, then searches him. This takes seconds.
What did happen was five minutes of "Officer says stand up, officer says get down. Officer says raise hands. Officer says lower hands.  Now crawl.  I didn't say 'officer says.' BANGBANGBANGBANG!"
Interspersed with threats to shoot him if he doesn't perform some odd contortions that a trained gymnast can't do.
The department found his behavior, and the modified weapon, against policy to be grounds to fire him.  Clearly, they did not think it was a good shoot.
Now, pay attention to the shot. Well, actually, it's a burst, which is criminally negligent under the circumstances, since there are lots of walls and lots of potential collateral casualties behind thin walls.
After the shot, does the pig say, "Fuck," or "Goddam," or even "Now I have do paperwork"?
No, he's placid.  Like shooting someone is just second nature, like walking past them on the sidewalk. He's completely unfazed. It's like he was shooting targets at the range, waiting for the next popup.
The body cam doesn't show his massive erection.  "Massive" relative, because you know it's possibly 2" long.
The suspect in question had no weapon. Someone had reported seeing a firearm through the hotel window, which is, (gasp!) legal in Arizona. In fact, it's legal to carry a gun openly in AZ with no license.  So they shot this law abiding citizen for not doing anything illegal. (It was a pellet pistol he used for pest control, professionally.)
I won't comment on the other cop who's too stupid to know which way a key card goes in a hotel. As someone else noted, apparently his hookers come to the house.
Now, per existing law, "I'm an incompetent, retarded, trigger-happy shithead who created a bad scenario and twitched, despite overwhelming firepower" is actually a legally valid defense for a pig. Don't try it yourself. You'll get life. (Unless you're an illegal alien in San Francisco, but I digress).
But it doesn't change the fact that this tatted up, sociopathic pig went into this event just begging to shoot someone and got his wish. He can have his mouthpiece claim otherwise all he wants.  The evidence is there.
Which is why I will cheer if someone hunts the fucker down and assfucks him with a shotgun.
In the meantime, the victim's family is going to sue, and own Mesa's budget for the year, and the taxpayers will pay for the bad judgment.
And his murder victim is still dead.
At least the department fired him. I credit them with decency for recognizing the fuckup. And note again, they obviously thought it was a problem.
Then, how often do prosecutors bring charges against their cop partners? Not very often. They obviously thought it was a problem.
Yes, there's a loophole that allows a cop to murder people and say "My bad!" and walk away. That does not make it a "good" shoot. There was zero reason to have a fucking dance with the suspect.  The longer that dance goes on, the more likely it is someone will die. 
Which is what this little pussy (and possibly his partner) was just BEGGING for.
Per other articles, he's not sure he wants to play cop anymore. I'd suggest he find a job more suited to his personality, like kitten snuff for a Bulgarian porn site.
If you're a copsucker and this post offends you, go on Grindr and find some cop cock to suck. There's plenty.
 
 
Page 41 of 126
