To Serve and to Protect

[AURaptor 1,137]

46 minutes ago, cole256 said:

4 hours ago, AURaptor said:

 You admit to blatantly accusing me of being a racist, and then fail to show any examples. All you can do it just say "whatever you said". That's the best you've got ? 

Sad

Yes moron, I called you this months maybe a year ago and you randomly bring it up again because you misspoke but of course you can't admit it. And I'm supposed to keep a documented record of things you say for yourself? Shut up, please stop making yourself look like this

 How did I randomly misspeak?  How about you shut up and stop accusing people of being things they aren't, especially if you're so dense that you can't remember the great offense that earned me this label in the first place.  You were the one who got so bent out of shape, why don't you come up with what you think I said or  admit you can't and then just retract your false claim 

[homersapien 12,353]

10 hours ago, alexava said:

Completely understandable. If you exercise this "right" to carry an assault rifle openly ( any race any situation) you also tag yourself as a suspect when a mass shooting takes place. You are asking for attention by carrying a weapon like that. Don't bitch when you get your attention. 

I don't understand the issue here.  How could the police not latch on to someone carrying a rifle when something like this goes down.  They would be idiots not to.  Also, it's very difficult to tell where the fire is coming from in the midst of large buildings echoing the reports.

Is the complaint about releasing his photo before checking him out?  Did the police do that?

(Sorry if the issue was described previously, but for whatever reason, I am having a very difficult time trying to navigate in this thread. )

 

[alexava 6,977]

6 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I don't understand the issue here.  How could the police not latch on to someone carrying a rifle when something like this goes down.  They would be idiots not to.  Also, it's very difficult to tell where the fire is coming from in the midst of large buildings echoing the reports.

Is the complaint about releasing his photo before checking him out?  Did the police do that?

(Sorry if the issue was described previously, but for whatever reason, I am having a very difficult time trying to navigate back in this thread to prior pages. )

 

People that seem to be mad at the way he was treated think the info they have now was all organized and clearly and readily available to all LEOs during total ******* chaos. I hate they didn't have time to properly kiss his ass. I do however appreciate his cooperation with cops and their handling it.

[TitanTiger 21,583]

11 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I don't understand the issue here.  How could the police not latch on to someone carrying a rifle when something like this goes down.  They would be idiots not to.  Also, it's very difficult to tell where the fire is coming from in the midst of large buildings echoing the reports.

Is the complaint about releasing his photo before checking him out?  Did the police do that?

(Sorry if the issue was described previously, but for whatever reason, I am having a very difficult time trying to navigate back in this thread to prior pages. )

 

Apparently they were supposed to by some magical Google facial recognition sorcery have just a picture of him, not release it to the public to see if anyone could tell them who he was, and find out stuff about him before putting his face out there.  I still haven't figured out how that was supposed to work or why such deference in the midst of this chaotic situation was necessary.  

To me, the only thing they should have done differently was to have referred to him as a person of interest on the first tweet rather than a suspect.  Other than that, I don't have a problem with what they did.

[homersapien 12,353]

Heck, I agree with Alexva, he's lucky he didn't get shot.  

[cole256 17,085]

Nobody is mad it's just ridiculous but as usual when it's not a threat to an individual it's no big deal. I love the personal kiss his ass statement...any other time you're crying a river if someone exaggerates a bit....who'd have guessed it? You do it yourself! Gasp! 

It was just another situation where a guy could be killed and make a couple of excuses as to why imo

[cole256 17,085]

Meanwhile they only kept him "30 minutes" but the police kept his picture up calling him a suspect up on their website and on Twitter the majority of the day.  They wouldn't let him record their interrogation. They asked him questions like why did he want to kill policemen. Said that witnesses saw them shooting their guns. 

They and their families have received thousands of death threats already and are still getting them. But oh well, collateral damage

[alexava 6,977]

I Hope somebody can make sense out of that.......

[cole256 17,085]

9 hours ago, alexava said:

I Hope somebody can make sense out of that.......

Typical

[TitanTiger 21,583]

9 hours ago, cole256 said:

Meanwhile they only kept him "30 minutes" but the police kept his picture up calling him a suspect up on their website and on Twitter the majority of the day.  They wouldn't let him record their interrogation. They asked him questions like why did he want to kill policemen. Said that witnesses saw them shooting their guns. 

They and their families have received thousands of death threats already and are still getting them. But oh well, collateral damage

Their initial tweet of him as a suspect was put up at 10:52pm CST.  Their next tweet referring to him as a "person of interest" and that he had turned himself in was 35 minutes later at 11:27pm CST.  A few hours later Dallas PD reported that he had spoken with police and had been released.

Also, point of fact, it is lawful in police interrogations for the police to tell a suspect false information to see how they react to it.  They spoke with him for about 30 minutes total and were satisfied that he had nothing to do with it.

I'm sorry that idiots are giving them death threats.  But under the circumstances at the time, they needed to quickly follow up on leads and find the killer or killers quickly before other people died.  The best way to do that if you have a video clip or photo of someone who may potentially be involved is to publicly disseminate those images and ask the public to call or for the person themselves to contact police.  As I said, it would have been better if they would have said "person of interest" instead of "suspect" from the start, but other than that, there was nothing wrong with what the police did.  It is standard operating procedure in situations such as this.  This notion that they could just have a photo of some random guy and magically Google him or something is wholly unrealistic.  The only way they could possible get a hit on his photo would be if he was already in a criminal database somewhere.  Otherwise, the public is your best resource.

[cole256 17,085]

But if it was you or your family I doubt you'd say well son it sucks that they pretty much put you out on a wanted poster but it just what had to happen...guarantee they didn't put a patrol at his house overnight or anything like that. 

Also I can't but help to lol that you keep referring to the Google reference as if it's already not used by policemen while using the term magic and you saying it's wholly unrealistic....I can't say I know any protocol in a situation like that as I imagine things are moving much faster, but saying it's unrealistic is completely false knowing what I know on how normal investigations are taken place.

As far as your timeline I wasn't following it as it happened but what I'm reading is different than what you are posting

[aubearcat 2,167]

Not to butt into your conversation, but I can't recall that we have used Google to look into a crime. I'm not going to definitively say we haven't done it , but I don't recall it. Now, we do use social media as a non- law enforcement tool. For whatever reason, our society wants to post every single minutia of their lives on some sort of social media even if it's criminal. 

[TitanTiger 21,583]

47 minutes ago, cole256 said:

But if it was you or your family I doubt you'd say well son it sucks that they pretty much put you out on a wanted poster but it just what had to happen...guarantee they didn't put a patrol at his house overnight or anything like that. 

Also I can't but help to lol that you keep referring to the Google reference as if it's already not used by policemen while using the term magic and you saying it's wholly unrealistic....I can't say I know any protocol in a situation like that as I imagine things are moving much faster, but saying it's unrealistic is completely false knowing what I know on how normal investigations are taken place.

As far as your timeline I wasn't following it as it happened but what I'm reading is different than what you are posting

No one is asking them to be happy at what has happened.  But the problem is, there isn't a reasonable alternative.  Only having a photo isn't going to be enough to find someone in a short amount of time when you have a killer on the loose.  So yes, given the circumstances of this particular situation, it is unrealistic.  And it is hardly outside of normal operating procedure to release a photo of someone you think may be connected to an active situation.  No one is saying it's acceptable for people to continue to harass him or his family, but realistically the Dallas PD in the midst of a chaotic shooting situation with the killer or killers still at large did about as best they could.  About the only thing they could have done better would have been to not use the term "suspect" initially.  But honestly, though more accurate, I'm not sure it would change to a large degree how people viewed him or them getting harassing calls and death threats.  People are idiots.

I was watching it on CNN, Fox and MSNBC as it unfolded.  And the timeline is accurate.  Dallas PD has pulled the original tweet but multiple sources can attest that the first tweet was sent out at 10:52pm CST.  The link to it used to be here:  https://twitter.com/DallasPD/status/751262719584575488/photo/1

The tweet that referred to him as a person of interest and that he had turned himself in came 35 minutes later at 11:27pm CST and can still be found here:  https://twitter.com/DallasPD/status/751271541459984384/photo/1

The interrogation lasted about 30 minutes.  The man in the photo, Mark Hughes, has said so himself:

Quote

“I just got out of an interrogation room for about 30 minutes, where police officers were lying, saying they had video of me shooting a gun, which is a lie, saying that they had witnesses saying I had shot a gun, which is a lie,” he said. “At the end of the day, the system was trying to get me.”

http://www.nytimes.com/live/news-dallas-shooting-protest/mark-hughes-dallas-suspect-released/[/quote]

I don't know what else to tell you.

[alexava 6,977]

21 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

White or black what does that have to do with anything? You insinuating the DPD posting it was racially motivated?  

If there were any white people openly carrying an AR-15 there last night I am pretty sure they would have done the same and I am pretty sure that if there was and they did not do the same then we would probably know about it by now with as many people that can take pictures. 

Besides, I don't recall seeing #1 suspect plastered everywhere, just his picture and that he was a suspect and this was based on the information they were given at the time. 

 

36 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

No one is asking them to be happy at what has happened.  But the problem is, there isn't a reasonable alternative.  Only having a photo isn't going to be enough to find someone in a short amount of time when you have a killer on the loose.  So yes, given the circumstances of this particular situation, it is unrealistic.  And it is hardly outside of normal operating procedure to release a photo of someone you think may be connected to an active situation.  No one is saying it's acceptable for people to continue to harass him or his family, but realistically the Dallas PD in the midst of a chaotic shooting situation with the killer or killers still at large did about as best they could.  About the only thing they could have done better would have been to not use the term "suspect" initially.  But honestly, though more accurate, I'm not sure it would change to a large degree how people viewed him or them getting harassing calls and death threats.  People are idiots.

I was watching it on CNN, Fox and MSNBC as it unfolded.  And the timeline is accurate.  Dallas PD has pulled the original tweet but multiple sources can attest that the first tweet was sent out at 10:52pm CST.  The link to it used to be here:  https://twitter.com/DallasPD/status/751262719584575488/photo/1

The tweet that referred to him as a person of interest and that he had turned himself in came 35 minutes later at 11:27pm CST and can still be found here:  https://twitter.com/DallasPD/status/751271541459984384/photo/1

The interrogation lasted about 30 minutes.  The man in the photo, Mark Hughes, has said so himself:

I don't know what else to tell you.

it matters not,what else you tell him. his mind is set. just let raptor take it from here.

[wdefromtx 3,888]

20 minutes ago, alexava said:

 

it matters not,what else you tell him. his mind is set. just let raptor take it from here.

I see what you did here....  

We are on the same page. 

[cole256 17,085]

42 minutes ago, alexava said:

 

it matters not,what else you tell him. his mind is set. just let raptor take it from here.

What you say as far as police matters means nothing, your family worked on the other side of the gun and you'll go all out to justify any action. Absolutely nothing. Now had your family ass been kicked instead of calling to come kick someone's ass you'd probably have a different retort, but that's not how it is here so yeah sit back talk crap with your buddies and high five and smilies. 

Fact of the matter is, it won't stay like this though

[cole256 17,085]

31 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

I see what you did here....  

We are on the same page. 

Lol. I'm sure your are!

[Auctoritas 2,938]

23 minutes ago, cole256 said:

What you say as far as police matters means nothing, your family worked on the other side of the gun and you'll go all out to justify any action. Absolutely nothing. Now had your family ass been kicked instead of calling to come kick someone's ass you'd probably have a different retort, but that's not how it is here so yeah sit back talk crap with your buddies and high five and smilies. 

Fact of the matter is, it won't stay like this though

 

By that logic, you are just as disqualified from discussion because you're speaking from the opposite side - your retort is different and just as entrenched. It doesn't make either of you wrong, but it does mean that you have to careful about putting on blinders.

Let's play a different thought puzzle - I have worked alongside police on and off for years and am in a position where I deal with constitutional, investigational, and emergency management issues every day as part of my job in public health, and I can confirm that TT is correct about the process and procedure questions here - these are legal, effective standard procedures that most police departments nationwide currently employ.

That said, you are correct that those policies, procedures, and processes need to be examined for inherent, overt, or hidden racism - all policies procedures and processes do need to be examined for it because we've built them on 200 years of institutional racism (deliberately in some cases, and accidentally/socially in others - its a fascinating history that I'd love to chat about).

So...is there a compromise, then, between your assertions/reservations/anger, and TT's (and proper/legal/effective emergency management) positions and procedures? What needed to be changed or done differently so that BOTH of your concerns were addressed to your satisfaction?

Work with me here on this. Prove it can be done...if we can have these conversations here on a message board, maybe there's hope that institutionally and politically we can have these conversations as well.

[alexava 6,977]

46 minutes ago, cole256 said:

What you say as far as police matters means nothing, your family worked on the other side of the gun and you'll go all out to justify any action. Absolutely nothing. Now had your family ass been kicked instead of calling to come kick someone's ass you'd probably have a different retort, but that's not how it is here so yeah sit back talk crap with your buddies and high five and smilies. 

Fact of the matter is, it won't stay like this though

absolutely absurd. my LE friends are as pissed over the bull**** that led to this as anyone.absolutely nothing happened in the past few days to high five and smile about. did you and your buddies high five when those cops were pronounced dead? no i don't think you did, i actually think you are more mature than that. or thought you were. you are critical of how LE handled an investigation minutes after 12 LEOs are on the ground with bullets in them and shots still being fired and this poor mistreated deprived soul had his picture on tv. 

[homersapien 12,353]

Anyone openly carrying an assault rifle in a public place is setting themselves up to be collateral damage. 

[AURaptor 1,137]

Quote

Anyone openly carrying an rifle in a public place is exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights.

 

Fixed.

[alexava 6,977]

15 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Anyone openly carrying an assault rifle in a public place is setting themselves up to be collateral damage. 

No s***!

[cole256 17,085]

22 minutes ago, alexava said:

absolutely absurd. my LE friends are as pissed over the bull**** that led to this as anyone.absolutely nothing happened in the past few days to high five and smile about. did you and your buddies high five when those cops were pronounced dead? no i don't think you did, i actually think you are more mature than that. or thought you were. you are critical of how LE handled an investigation minutes after 12 LEOs are on the ground with bullets in them and shots still being fired and this poor mistreated deprived soul had his picture on tv. 

I had things to say because I knew what has happened would happened, he would start getting death threats and whatnot, some people on my timeline still posting his pics calling him the shooter. So like I said while you make your little jokes like the deprived soul comment I just wonder how you'd react to death threats to you and yours....

 

Also you doing that but at the same time feeling like you're the Leo of the forum when I say something and you have to go on a rant and tell me to exaggerating....well yeah I can't help but to see the hypocrisy in that as well. So I guess I figured you were more mature as well, or thought you were...

[alexava 6,977]

Cole the dude carried an assault rifle to a protest that was supposed to be PEACEFUL. He brought this on himself, not the police/ media who posted his picture. it does suck for him, i get that. it is what it is. i don't know if you are aware, but i am not a fan of open carry ((any gun) or assault rifles (i think these are military weapons and made to kill people in high volumes). it is not a police matter, race matter, media matter. this guy wanted to be seen and heard, now he is backtracking this new fame he got. not defending any death threats.  that is ridiculous.

[cole256 17,085]

54 minutes ago, Auctoritas said:

 

By that logic, you are just as disqualified from discussion because you're speaking from the opposite side - your retort is different and just as entrenched. It doesn't make either of you wrong, but it does mean that you have to careful about putting on blinders.

Let's play a different thought puzzle - I have worked alongside police on and off for years and am in a position where I deal with constitutional, investigational, and emergency management issues every day as part of my job in public health, and I can confirm that TT is correct about the process and procedure questions here - these are legal, effective standard procedures that most police departments nationwide currently employ.

That said, you are correct that those policies, procedures, and processes need to be examined for inherent, overt, or hidden racism - all policies procedures and processes do need to be examined for it because we've built them on 200 years of institutional racism (deliberately in some cases, and accidentally/socially in others - its a fascinating history that I'd love to chat about).

So...is there a compromise, then, between your assertions/reservations/anger, and TT's (and proper/legal/effective emergency management) positions and procedures? What needed to be changed or done differently so that BOTH of your concerns were addressed to your satisfaction?

Work with me here on this. Prove it can be done...if we can have these conversations here on a message board, maybe there's hope that institutionally and politically we can have these conversations as well.

I hear what you are saying, and your first paragraph you are EXACTLY right. It was sort of my entire point. I get tired of when I argue my point it's he just hear what he wants and all that. Like I'm any different than anybody else that posts. But hey in the grand scheme of things you're right. If I'm right or I'm not I have to present myself a certain way as well...I get frustrated because I know I have a perspective and see things that 95% that post on here don't, but I'm the one that's disregarded. Or at least I feel I am. Thanks though, and I'm serious not being sarcastic about that