Armed Patrol Groups

[Coyote33]

Didn't citizens or civilians also take down the plane over Pennsylvania?

 

[Twigg]

...

 

[mikem317]

A citizen found the marathon bomber.

And he was a civilian to boot!

 

[Winchester73]

Can't the Sheriff deputize some of the locals? Serious question.

Flame away, but I have to believe that it is a pretty tight knit community and if I were the Sheriff, I would ask 10 of the most level headed, responsible guys I know if they would step up and become volunteer deputies.

It has happened before. When faced with lawlessness, citizens would meet and form "Committees of Vigilance". These citizens decided that they had had enough of criminal activity and took the responsibility for order upon themselves, hence the term "vigilante".

There is nobody on Earth that is better qualified to protect me and mine from evil than me.

 

[turbo89]

I can't believe it took this many post until someone pointed out this quote:

“Who else is going to protect you when your government can't?” Selig said.

This whole story reeks of politicians trying to extort the citizens.

The local pols were trying to bully the town into raising taxes by focusing on these essential services and then spreading fear through the way the messaged things. Happily the town told them to go **** themselves and took it upon themselves to sort things out. There's the REAL lesson in this. Do not play their game, change the rules.

Bob hit the nail on the head.

 

[AntiHippie]

http://www.currypilot.com/News/Local-News/Could-Curry-become-like-Josephine

Not the article I was looking for, but it's a bit more current. I'm tired and don't feel like searching for the one about the road fund.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Well, since the guy who started the group is a former LEO, I don't see the issue here - it's not like it's someone who doesn't have any experience with the law is running around there.

The essence of law enFORCEment is FORCE - the societal expectation that the orders of a law enforcement officer will be obeyed, and that the officer can and will use whatever level of force is the minimum necessary to obtain compliance. Hopefully, professional standards and training assure that said force is used in a lawful manner - and, despite the occasional breakdown, that system usually works.

When you have persons without the lawful authority doing something more than responding to a crime in progress, it's a setup for a mess. What if one of these self-appointed pseudo officers does a traffic stop and the subject refuses to stop, comply or submit to the subservient position it comes to "any weapons on you?". I have absolutely no authority to demand someone I am talking to show his hands or disarm himself, and the non-officer conduction traffic stops doesn't either. Plus, if there are going to be encounters when a reasonable person would assume the person is a police officer, it's reasonable to require some visible display of "lack of authority". (some jurisdictions limit badge shape for private security for this reason).

 

[DMan7]

The essence of law enFORCEment is FORCE - the societal expectation that the orders of a law enforcement officer will be obeyed, and that the officer can in and will use whatever level of force is the minimum necessary to obtain compliance.

Without police, we can expect that law enforcement will not be similar.

What if one of these self-appointed pseudo officers does a traffic stop and the subject refuses to stop, comply or submit to the subservient position it comes to "any weapons on you?".

Why would a citizen cop conduct a traffic stop? Why would they need to ask "do you have weapons on you?"

I have absolutely no authority to demand someone I am talking to show his hands or disarm himself, and the non-officer conduction traffic stops doesn't either.

Not only do you have no authority, but you have no reason to stop them.

What the politicians fail to realize is without an organized sanctioned law enforcement, there is no law, there are no arrests, there is no jail, no booking, no tickets no nothing - other than that which is imposed by the citizens *and accepted* by the 'criminal' quite frankly.

Traffic stop? I wouldn't stop for any of them. Geez they're just a bunch of yahoo vigilantes..who knows what they could do to me or my family if I pull over..

..and right there ladies and gentlemen is where the worm turns, where the reality sets in that the populace in this town is the one in charge and we are once again back in the Wild West. A time of much simpler yet much harsher laws. Wild West law is a lot less expensive to maintain. Fits in your budget with the room to spare.

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Why on earth would a citizen cop carry out a traffic stop?

The original post was in regard to a HOA that had private security that was conducting traffic stops.

 

[DMan7]

The original post was in regard to a HOA that had private security that was conducting traffic stops.

Rob I do not see any HOA or traffic stops referenced in the story about the budget crunch in Josephine County in Oregon.

?

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk 2

 

[noxin]

The original post was in regard to a HOA that had private security that was conducting traffic stops.

Wrong thread?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Rob I do not see any HOA or traffic stops referenced in the story about the budget crunch in Josephine County in Oregon.

?

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk 2

I may I have this thread mixed up with the news report of a court that held the exclusionary rule did not apply to contraband discovered by a HOA security patrol service that was conducting traffic stops on HOA property.

 

[dwarven1]

Yeah, I think so.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[WatchCityCPA]

Another problem is methed out tweakers that think absolutely nothing of beating the shit out of elderly people for the change in their pocket. Can we really expect them to defend themselves?...

Of course, seeing how the LEO/sheriffs can not defend those elderly people anyway, even if they had the duty to, which they established a long time ago they do not.

And yes, the whole "we'll defund the sheriff's department" is a straight up extortion attempt from the government - there were many other places to cut funding from that would have hurt the voters less. The cuts were designed to cow the "subjects" into obeying - whoops.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

And yes, the whole "we'll defund the sheriff's department" is a straight up extortion attempt from the government - there were many other places to cut funding from that would have hurt the voters less. The cuts were designed to cow the "subjects" into obeying - whoops.

Back in 1980 the big fight was over Proposition 2 1/2(*). In the same spirit, the Boston PD substation in Brighton had a huge yellow sign in front - "Closed By CItizens Vote".

* - This resulted in the concept of an override referendum, and the constant end-runs of moving tax funded services (school busses; school sports; garbage collection) into separately billed service. See Emerson College v. Boston for an interesting attempt by the city of Boston to bill for "services" that were not an option the taxpayer could choose to use or take a pass on (which is a huge part of why Boston lost that case, and why pay per bag garbage always has an "opt out" even if the town has a fixed annual fee + per bag charge).

 

[Sig Sauer Shooter]

So who is not a citizen?

Obama's Aunt & Uncle living in Boston....

 

[AntiHippie]

Of course, seeing how the LEO/sheriffs can not defend those elderly people anyway, even if they had the duty to, which they established a long time ago they do not.

And yes, the whole "we'll defund the sheriff's department" is a straight up extortion attempt from the government - there were many other places to cut funding from that would have hurt the voters less. The cuts were designed to cow the "subjects" into obeying - whoops.

They don't? I've only lived in Curry County for a few years, but from what I've seen, our local agencies are quite professional and care quite a bit about their communities and neighbors. The NES typified 'JBT thing' isn't a thing out here.
[Edit: I may have misread your statement. No question the courts have ruled that L/E is not obligated to protect anyone.]


And I can't speak for Josephine County, since I don't live there so I haven't followed it as closely as Curry County, but here in Curry it's no extortion attempt - the money just plain isn't there to allocate to the Sheriff's Department. ALL county services are in the same boat, that particular one is just the most visible and makes the best news. Except for the road fund. I haven't quite figured that out. Doesn't quite make sense to me.

Some here: (And you guys will like some of the other letters)
http://www.currypilot.com/Opinion/Letters/Letters-to-the-editor-Dec-28-2013

Some here:
http://www.currypilot.com/News/Local-News/Layoffs-loom-for-Curry-County

Here's the one I was looking for:
http://www.currypilot.com/News/Loca...ty-commissioners-to-keep-33-million-for-roads

 

[Coyote33]

Yes the Sheriff can deputize some locals, But then he is responsible if they do something stupid, and he has failed to supervise or train them. That also costs money. Better off having them as "Unauthorized" eyes and ears.

See the link in post #59.

 

[Blitz1]

Most good people are able/capable to defend themselves. They're better off if they're organized though.

 

[hunt4riches]

I thought the police were citizens?

I thought citizens were police... (citizens arrest????)

 

[WatchCityCPA]

Of course, seeing how the LEO/sheriffs can not defend those elderly people anyway, even if they had the duty to, which they established a long time ago they do not.

And yes, the whole "we'll defund the sheriff's department" is a straight up extortion attempt from the government - there were many other places to cut funding from that would have hurt the voters less. The cuts were designed to cow the "subjects" into obeying - whoops.

They don't? I've only lived in Curry County for a few years, but from what I've seen, our local agencies are quite professional and care quite a bit about their communities and neighbors. The NES typified 'JBT thing' isn't a thing out here.
[Edit: I may have misread your statement. No question the courts have ruled that L/E is not obligated to protect anyone.]
...

First - I appreciate the first hand information, the news articles and the straight forward approach you take to posting on NES. +1 for making NES a better place.

I believe you missed a part of my argument (see bold above): even if they felt they had an obligation to (which they could, despite the court rulings stating that they do not), they cannot protect individuals from random attacks (when seconds count, police are only minutes away, etc.). The only people who can do that are the individuals themselves.

Just by looking at the letters to the editor, it seems that funds are available in the reserve road fund and the government decided to not use them, but I do not have the time to dig into the Curry County budget woes and determine whether they genuinely do not have the money to fund a skeleton sheriff's department. I'll just say that EVERY TIME I've engaged in that kind of exercise, the result was that the defunding was used as hurt taxpayers as much as possible as a punishment/incentive to raise taxes. Maybe Curry County is an exception... and maybe Obama is an honest, misunderstood libertarian.

 

[calsdad]

Soldiers are citizens.

Exactly. People who can't figure out what the difference is and why it's important need to back and read some Heinlein.

 

[mac1911]

I noticed the road fund for this county is ok....hmmm maybe they do a better job at money management. Control of cost and maintain better.
OK so if my boss cant afford me anymore i get the pink slip. If my services are not worth the cost I get the pink slip. Why should be any different for any paying job? As for removing funds from the road fund doesnt solve the problem...its just robbing peter to pay paul...

here in massachusetts the wildlife devission was self sufficient and actually turning in revenue until dukacus(sp?) decided to tap into it and put in genral funds.

 

[calsdad]

Sure is - much higher demand on county services means higher costs. Higher demand is due to higher unemployment, which, in turn, means less revenue. More expenses, less revenue. Then the double whammy of the O&C timber payments from the .gov to the counties being cut off (which is, as I understand it, fair - if the land isn't being logged, well...)

Long term fix is to get people back to work. Short term fix is money from somewhere. These departments aren't posturing - they truly are that broke. Some of the laid off deputies are personal friends of mine.

I'm fortunate to live within a city that has an outstanding municipal police department, so it doesn't directly affect me TOO much. Still indirectly affects me since it draws the tweakers to the area like methed out moths to a flame, and our neighborhood has been seemingly cased. Good neighbors and due precautions help, though.

It's stuff like this why I hate the current system as a whole and why I think the taxation structure is MASSIVELY unfair. I don't know if Oregon has state income tax - but what typically goes on is people are taxed on their income - by the Feds and the state (if the state has it) -and then they basically have to fight to get the money back by sending their "representatives" into the system.

If we taxation weren't so massive in this country - the people of that county would have just much more money back in their pocket. Instead they're being forced to pay for illegal immigrant welfare, wars overseas, foreign aid, subsidized abortion, massive cost overruns on defense projects - you name it. AND that very same federal government that has been made so powerful by all that stolen money - is causing the problem in the first place by preventing them from cutting timber.

It's things like this why I think this country is so very corrupted right to the core.

 

[calsdad]

humanity got along just fine without a standing police force, especially in rural areas and sparsely populated territories. The real problem is that laws used to be much simpler then. The difference is not "law of the jungle" vs "civilized society", it's the same thing, just attaching different labels to actors in each scenario.

That's a good part of the problem. The law in this country has been manipulated and twisted to serve a number of different masters - and the traditional "master" of morality often takes a back burner to a whole bunch of other things.

As McConnely pointed out - the timber is being prevented from being cut by the Feds. The Feds are doing this because special interest groups use the Feds as a very large hammer to protect endangered wildlife.

The very thought of cooperation never seems to enter the thought process here - it's always - "those people are bad therefore we must **** them over by using the government".

I'm sure there's some way that could be found to still harvest timber and yet protect the spotted wild dildo bird - but nobody really wants to even consider that.

 

[calsdad]

Another problem is methed out tweakers that think absolutely nothing of beating the shit out of elderly people for the change in their pocket. Can we really expect them to defend themselves?

Also, keep in mind that Sheriffs Departments do a lot more than just run the jails out here. All 'dry land' SAR is run by them - even upriver is all Sheriffs Departments. USCG doesn't (can't due to water depth) handle much above the 101 bridges. Parole and probation - not run by the courts run by the Sheriffs. Firearms licensing, even though we can all agree it shouldn't exist, it does, and it's run by Sheriffs. Volunteers there, actually, since that hasn't been funded for a while and they believe in the Constitution out here.


In principle, I agree with you. Seeing the reality with my own eyes makes me feel a bit differently about it, though.

Sometimes though you must look at the reality that is right in front of your face and think very seriously about how it got so effed up to begin with. If you do not understand the roots of the problem - then it can NEVER be fixed. You must peel back the layers of bullshit sometimes to get to the core of what REALLY MUST BE DONE - vs - what everybody thinks must be done.

This is typical human behavior. I see this constantly at my job. I've been there 10+ years - so I've watched things evolve over the years - and I can tell you that the people who understand who things came to be screwed up in the here and now - are few and far between. Most of them look at what is right in front of their face - see something broken - and then say " well let's go do this" - instead of saying " things used to work well BEFORE we did this thing - so maybe it's time to stop doing that thing".

- - - Updated - - -

that's why I mentioned simpler laws. Right or wrong, a lot of troublemakers took leave of the gene pool fairly early, in the earlier days. This doesn't mean that injustice never happened, it just went along with power, just like it does today but in a different way. Having the burden of enforcing modern, more gentle laws takes a lot of resources, the resources that these people don't have. Many moonbats in the comments section bitch about "vigilantiism" but they don't want to fund their rosy dreams with their cash.

I don't know much about "wild" territories, aside from Slavs and some border land history. Religion played a big role there as the moral compass too, but it also created problems of different kind where the compass would go haywire.

They also completely ignore the fact that much modern law is essentially vigilantism made respectable by putting a uniform on it.

 

[calsdad]

Well, since the guy who started the group is a former LEO, I don't see the issue here - it's not like it's someone who doesn't have any experience with the law is running around there. Since he's local, he's got an interest in keeping the area safe... and since he's former LEO, he knows (one would assume) what procedures he can and should pass along to his neighbors. (hopefully, no-knock warrants are NOT one of the ones he's teaching... )



The thing that bugs me about that phrase is how similar it is to "friends with benefits"... and when you're friends with benefits, you KNOW that someone is getting screwed.







Where I live in VT is such a small town that we don't even HAVE a police department. The VSP is supposed to provide police services, but I think I've seen a statie drive through ONCE in 6 months. No worries... Col. Colt keeps our house safe. (or Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson, if my future sister-in-law is responding...).

I see no reason why "volunteer" law enforcement could not work - the same way volunteer fire departments work in MANY areas. I believe that in most cases people want to do the right thing. Unfortunately the examples so many liberals use to justify the state taking over everything are true (vigilantism, cronyism, etc) - but their case only really works when you completely ignore all the bad things the state does when it takes over these vital parts of society.

I honestly think a cold hard impassionate look at what truly WORKS for people - would lead a lot of people to conclude that 'volunteer' law enforcement - with proper training and safeguards - could work just as well in many cases as the government provided type. There are certain things that probably could not be handled by 'volunteers' , like murder and and major crimes, but there's also no reason a structure couldn't be setup to have 'professionals' come in to handle those sorts of things if they happened in a jurisdiction with volunteers.

The biggest roadblock here is the government and all it's laws and regulations - which really work in most cases to hamper or completely outlaw what could be solutions that would work well for people if they wanted to go that way.

 

[calsdad]

If I remember correctly citizens also stopped the shoe bomber on the plane and a citizen stopped the bomber in NY.

As sovereign citizens they have the authority to do this.
We delegate authority to the police we do not have to surrender ours just because there are police.

Exactly. What we're looking at here is actually a very fundamental thing that got changed and was done on purpose to bury the heart of the republic this country used to be. Once power shifts to the govt. - they don't want to give it up.

 

[calsdad]

The essence of law enFORCEment is FORCE - the societal expectation that the orders of a law enforcement officer will be obeyed, and that the officer can and will use whatever level of force is the minimum necessary to obtain compliance. Hopefully, professional standards and training assure that said force is used in a lawful manner - and, despite the occasional breakdown, that system usually works.

When you have persons without the lawful authority doing something more than responding to a crime in progress, it's a setup for a mess. What if one of these self-appointed pseudo officers does a traffic stop and the subject refuses to stop, comply or submit to the subservient position it comes to "any weapons on you?". I have absolutely no authority to demand someone I am talking to show his hands or disarm himself, and the non-officer conduction traffic stops doesn't either. Plus, if there are going to be encounters when a reasonable person would assume the person is a police officer, it's reasonable to require some visible display of "lack of authority". (some jurisdictions limit badge shape for private security for this reason).

Part of the problem with your line of reasoning - is that it's dependent on societal or cultural outlook that has taken root over probably the last 100 years or so.

Many places used to have "peace officers" - instead of "law enFORCEment". People who mis-behaved used to treated differently than they are now - instead of the presumption of a beat-down - there was a presumption of "you know you did something wrong - now stop acting like an ahole or I'll tell your mother".

This is another example of what I mentioned previously - to figure out why the current situation is so screwed up you really have to unravel how you got there in the first place.

Since the current day society appears to be headed nowhere good - I think doing that is more imperative than ever.

 

[calsdad]

I noticed the road fund for this county is ok....hmmm maybe they do a better job at money management. Control of cost and maintain better.
OK so if my boss cant afford me anymore i get the pink slip. If my services are not worth the cost I get the pink slip. Why should be any different for any paying job? As for removing funds from the road fund doesnt solve the problem...its just robbing peter to pay paul...

here in massachusetts the wildlife devission was self sufficient and actually turning in revenue until dukacus(sp?) decided to tap into it and put in genral funds.

Robbing money from the roads fund is just a recipe for disaster - and for implementing what we have here in MA - where the politicians constantly cry for higher taxes because there's never enough money in any fund for anything.

The roads fund should stand separately and not be subject to looting if some other area of the government cannot fund itself. Sooner or later there's going to be a bridge out or a washed away highway or a road that needs resurfacing - and the "excess" funds will get used.