GOP rep wants to cut funding for federal ‘paramilitary units’ after BLM dispute

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Dreadclaw69**

http://www.officer.com/news/11443588/report-faults-communication-in-dorner-manhunt?utm_source=Officer.com+Newsday+E-Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=CPS140430005

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Communication and coordination problems between at least a half dozen regional law enforcement agencies impeded efforts to stop cop-turned-killer Christopher Dorner and possibly endangered lives during his 10-day revenge mission across Southern California last year, according to an independent report released Monday.

The report, released by the District of Columbia-based Police Foundation, praised the overall work of police and sheriff's officials in an area encompassing four counties but identified several areas for improvement. It especially called for all regional agencies to immediately upgrade their communication systems so officers in different agencies across regions can talk to one another.

In one chilling example, police officers in Riverside were unaware that Dorner had just opened fire on two LAPD officers in the neighboring city of Corona just minutes before they themselves were ambushed at a red light. The information was not relayed for 10 minutes and the LAPD officers were relying on cellphones to communicate because they were too far out-of-range for their police system to work.

One of the Riverside officers died and the other was injured. The two LAPD officers survived.

The online report includes a snippet of previously unreleased video from the Riverside officers' patrol car that shows Dorner's truck approaching through the intersection, followed by a bright flash of gunfire as he opened fire. The patrol car then slowly rolls through the intersection.

"The Riverside Police Department was under attack before officers even knew Dorner was there. As the dispatcher began broadcasting the urgent alert from the Corona incident, she was interrupted by a frantic call of 'officer down,'" according to the report.

The study's authors also found that too many officers raced to the scene when authorities had Dorner holed up in a cabin in the San Bernardino Mountains, creating a dangerous situation and making narrow mountain roads nearly impassable for the SWAT teams in charge.

"Witnesses said hundreds of law enforcement officers responded to the scene, some from over 100 miles away. Valuable time was wasted managing the vast number of ill-prepared police officers who left the much warmer coastal and inland climates of Southern California for the extreme cold of a mountain ski resort at 7,000-foot altitude," the authors said. "As one chief of police would later declare, 'I had no business going up there.'"

A turf war between police in Irvine and Riverside County sheriff's officials over who would do forensics analysis on Dorner's abandoned and burnt-out truck also delayed the investigation into the killings of Dorner's first two victims, a retired LAPD captain's daughter and her fiance.

The two were found shot dead in a car in the parking lot of an Irvine condominium complex and the killings were eventually linked to Dorner, who had posted a manifesto online outlining his intent to target and murder police officers.

Police agencies across Southern California spent 10 frantic days tracking Dorner as he moved from suburban Orange County, to San Diego and back north to the remote and snow-covered mountains east of Los Angeles.

Dorner, who had been fired from the Los Angeles Police Department, eventually shot himself in the burning cabin where he holed up.

He killed four people during his revenge mission, including the couple in Irvine, the Riverside police officer who was ambushed while on patrol, and a San Bernardino County sheriff's detective who was shot during the final gun battle.

The LAPD thanked the report's authors and said they had also been conducting an internal review into the event, which was "unprecedented in modern law enforcement history."

"As we review this report, and continue to reevaluate our law enforcement response, let us not forget the lives that were lost and the families that were torn apart by this killer," LAPD Police Chief Charlie Beck said.

Granted all involved were LEOs, but I imagine that the problems listed grow exponentially when different departments with different mandates have to co-operate. That is why I am in favour of the BLM, IRS, etc. relying on local LEOs, Marshalls, or FBI

**dogma**

Captain Avatar wrote:

Ok. You choose to intentionally ignore/side step your use of racist elitist language for attempt at casual dismissal. Consider yourself reported.

In what way is "red neck" a racist term?

Is "poor, white conservative" a race now?

**whitedragon**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
http://www.officer.com/news/11443588/report-faults-communication-in-dorner-manhunt?utm_source=Officer.com+Newsday+E-Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=CPS140430005

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Communication and coordination problems between at least a half dozen regional law enforcement agencies impeded efforts to stop cop-turned-killer Christopher Dorner and possibly endangered lives during his 10-day revenge mission across Southern California last year, according to an independent report released Monday.

The report, released by the District of Columbia-based Police Foundation, praised the overall work of police and sheriff's officials in an area encompassing four counties but identified several areas for improvement. It especially called for all regional agencies to immediately upgrade their communication systems so officers in different agencies across regions can talk to one another.

In one chilling example, police officers in Riverside were unaware that Dorner had just opened fire on two LAPD officers in the neighboring city of Corona just minutes before they themselves were ambushed at a red light. The information was not relayed for 10 minutes and the LAPD officers were relying on cellphones to communicate because they were too far out-of-range for their police system to work.

One of the Riverside officers died and the other was injured. The two LAPD officers survived.

The online report includes a snippet of previously unreleased video from the Riverside officers' patrol car that shows Dorner's truck approaching through the intersection, followed by a bright flash of gunfire as he opened fire. The patrol car then slowly rolls through the intersection.

"The Riverside Police Department was under attack before officers even knew Dorner was there. As the dispatcher began broadcasting the urgent alert from the Corona incident, she was interrupted by a frantic call of 'officer down,'" according to the report.

The study's authors also found that too many officers raced to the scene when authorities had Dorner holed up in a cabin in the San Bernardino Mountains, creating a dangerous situation and making narrow mountain roads nearly impassable for the SWAT teams in charge.

"Witnesses said hundreds of law enforcement officers responded to the scene, some from over 100 miles away. Valuable time was wasted managing the vast number of ill-prepared police officers who left the much warmer coastal and inland climates of Southern California for the extreme cold of a mountain ski resort at 7,000-foot altitude," the authors said. "As one chief of police would later declare, 'I had no business going up there.'"

A turf war between police in Irvine and Riverside County sheriff's officials over who would do forensics analysis on Dorner's abandoned and burnt-out truck also delayed the investigation into the killings of Dorner's first two victims, a retired LAPD captain's daughter and her fiance.

The two were found shot dead in a car in the parking lot of an Irvine condominium complex and the killings were eventually linked to Dorner, who had posted a manifesto online outlining his intent to target and murder police officers.

Police agencies across Southern California spent 10 frantic days tracking Dorner as he moved from suburban Orange County, to San Diego and back north to the remote and snow-covered mountains east of Los Angeles.

Dorner, who had been fired from the Los Angeles Police Department, eventually shot himself in the burning cabin where he holed up.

He killed four people during his revenge mission, including the couple in Irvine, the Riverside police officer who was ambushed while on patrol, and a San Bernardino County sheriff's detective who was shot during the final gun battle.

The LAPD thanked the report's authors and said they had also been conducting an internal review into the event, which was "unprecedented in modern law enforcement history."

"As we review this report, and continue to reevaluate our law enforcement response, let us not forget the lives that were lost and the families that were torn apart by this killer," LAPD Police Chief Charlie Beck said.

Granted all involved were LEOs, but I imagine that the problems listed grow exponentially when different departments with different mandates have to co-operate. That is why I am in favour of the BLM, IRS, etc. relying on local LEOs, Marshalls, or FBI

How does an article about different groups failing to cooperate efficiently convince you that relying on different groups to cooperate is the best solution over letting the BLM still do what its supposed to do?

**Ouze**

whitedragon wrote:
How does an article about different groups failing to cooperate efficiently convince you that relying on different groups to cooperate is the best solution over letting the BLM still do what its supposed to do?

Yeah, the conclusion to that article really tossed me, I thought you were making a really strong argument FOR strong federal law enforcement.

**Seaward**

whitedragon wrote:
How does an article about different groups failing to cooperate efficiently convince you that relying on different groups to cooperate is the best solution over letting the BLM still do what its supposed to do?

Because if you remove all but one agency, it's tough to have inter-agency failure to cooperate.

**Medium of Death**

It would be interesting to know how often those agencies needed to use their own officers.

Was the BLM really seen to be over stepping the line considering the resistance they had been facing for 20+ years? The fact that Bundy is fething crazy and surrounded himself with fantasists surely also counts for something?

Surely even for the complexity of the various laws it is better to have specialised agencies that deal with their own particular niche? Regular Police have a fairly hard time keeping up with the Law as it is.

**WarOne**

dogma wrote:
Captain Avatar wrote:

Ok. You choose to intentionally ignore/side step your use of racist elitist language for attempt at casual dismissal. Consider yourself reported.

In what way is "red neck" a racist term?

Is "poor, white conservative" a race now?

They're a repressed, discriminated minority now.

Liberals charge them extra for sugary drinks, limit their ability to buy and use guns, and discourage praying while participating in government.

Truly we have regressed. *sarcasm*

**Frazzled**

Jihadin wrote:
I rather jerk off a Rattle Snake in a locked phone booth then be a part of that fiasco in Waco. Just saying

This is a visual in my head that I didn't need.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:
It's hard to imagine a non-police government agency needing to use deadly force as a matter of carrying out the law. And if there are such scenarios, I submit that they be within the active jurisdiction of the police in the first place.

Again agreed.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Captain Avatar wrote:
LordofHats wrote: Yeah. And there are, shock put on your surprised face, laws about how land is mean to be managed, and BLM is mandated with enforcing those laws. Given that they often end up dealing with red necks, that they have their own armed division shouldn't a shock to anyone.Read your own link;

Thank you for the use of the racist/elitist derogatory language there. Says a lot about you. Bet you wonder why blue collar southerners don't cotton to you much.

Really, your "enlightened" liberal tolerance is really shining through here.

Also, you might want to check where the majority of federally protected land is and ask why.

No one wanted it?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

The report, released by the District of Columbia-based Police Foundation, praised the overall work of police and sheriff's officials in an area encompassing four counties

I imagine the two ladies who were shot up in a truck by police for mistaking them for a big black guy in a completely different and differently painted truck would disagree.

**LordofHats**

Seaward wrote:

You'd think that Fish and Wildlife's police could cover that.

I think NOAA also manages artificial fisheries. And this of course goes to my earlier point; the problem isn't armed federal agents, it's numerous redundant federal agencies that often find themselves in overlapping mandates.

Or, if we're talking about off-shore illegality, the Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard are involved but they're not allowed to go on shore and investigate stuff. They also tend to be more active in foreign poachers, cause apparently Indians like coming all the way over here to take our fish (Japan and China took all theirs).

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for creating law enforcement agencies with exceedingly narrow mandates. It smacks of both efficiency and frugality.

If people want to argue against law enforcement agencies that might not be wholly necessary, that's a conversations worth having. There's a lot of bloat imo in the executive and a lot of agencies that could be done away with. Arguing in our current system though that a body with law enforcement responsibilities should not have the power to carry out its mission is asinine.

Because if you remove all but one agency, it's tough to have inter-agency failure to cooperate.

That's why we have all these desperate law enforcement agencies. NOAA has specialized law enforcement needs distinct from those of BLM or EPA or whoever. Unless you want to roll the entire executive branch into one agency which would be far too massive to coordinate, the simplist solution is to give each agency responsible for carrying out different aspects of the law the power to enforce those aspects.

It eliminates the need for any regulatory agencies to coordinate with another every time they deal with something within their field.

Yeah, the conclusion to that article really tossed me, I thought you were making a really strong argument FOR strong federal law enforcement.

That's how this thread got started XD

Surely even for the complexity of the various laws it is better to have specialised agencies that deal with their own particular niche? Regular Police have a fairly hard time keeping up with the Law as it is.

One of the biggest things attributing to this need is that our regulations are pants on head ridiculous. That doesn't mean they make no sense, it means that making sense of them is more complicated than trying to figure out how Bjorn uses his invulnerable save. Like the US tax code, most of our regulations are this massive things that go on and on and on and take a specialist in those regulations to explain to anyone.

The US has a growing problem of bumbling regulations that kind of need addressing. Fat chance of that happening though.

**Relapse**

Medium of Death wrote:
It would be interesting to know how often those agencies needed to use their own officers.

Was the BLM really seen to be over stepping the line considering the resistance they had been facing for 20+ years? The fact that Bundy is fething crazy and surrounded himself with fantasists surely also counts for something?

Surely even for the complexity of the various laws it is better to have specialised agencies that deal with their own particular niche? Regular Police have a fairly hard time keeping up with the Law as it is.

In the first couple of encounters with the BLM he and his family were unarmed, as I believe they remained throughout the incident. When they were recording the cattle being taken, they were surrounded by BLM agents who beat up one of his sons and took him away without word of charges or where he was being held for several hours because they were not in a "first ammendment area." While this was happening, snipers on a hill were taking aim at him and other family members.
The BLM, as I said earlier, set the pace on this one.

**LordofHats**

While this was happening, snipers on a hill were taking aim at him and other family members.

Yes, the infamous fictional snipers that Bundy says were there, but I tend to find everything he says questionable and no articles mention the presence of snipers until after the stand off started (except for the likes of infowars) sooooo

**Kanluwen**

LordofHats wrote:
While this was happening, snipers on a hill were taking aim at him and other family members.

Yes, the infamous fictional snipers that Bundy says were there, but I tend to find everything he says questionable and no articles mention the presence of snipers until after the stand off started (except for the likes of infowars) sooooo

Don't forget the "incoming drone strikes" that caused the Oathkeepers to flee.

**Ouze**

Kanluwen wrote:
Don't forget the "incoming drone strikes" that caused the Oathkeepers to flee.

Obviously, we need to sponsor legislation to prevent Eric Holder from calling in drone strikes on American protesters.

**Breotan**

d-usa wrote:
Are the same people that always scream "we need guns because cops can't be anywhere and cops have no mandate to protect anybody anyway" now saying "people don't need guns, just call the damn cops"?

Only if you take everything we said completely out of context and make up your own version of events. However, if you actually take what we said in context, you'd note that we're saying GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, not private citizens, don't need separate police forces when they already have the FBI. But, please, continue stuffing your strawman. With all the dead cattle out there, there's plenty of unused straw available.

**Frazzled**

Also to keep from selling firearms to drug cartels.

**streamdragon**

Breotan wrote:
With all the dead cattle out there, there's plenty of unused straw available.

I know you're simply making a point re: strawman, but for whatever reason feel compelled to point out that straw is used for bedding, not food. And as Bundy's cattle were range cattle, they didn't actually get straw.

sorry, I raise animals.

**LordofHats**

don't need separate police forces when they already have the FBI

That really only says that people don't know what the FBI does. They've never been intended at any point as the only federal law enforcement body*. There might be too many such agencies but arguing one can handle the varied interests of every government body is... I don't know. I need to break out my thesaurus and find more words that mean the same thing as bad idea.

*Most of these agencies are not new. Some like BIA and the Forest Service predate the FBI, and many others were formed prior to the 80's. Homeland Security was the biggest shake up in the Executive for decades. The FBI was created to tackle growing interstate crime, and since have expanded as a generalist federal law enforcement body, but they can hardly be expected to do every little bit of enforcing for the Feds.

**Relapse**

LordofHats wrote:
While this was happening, snipers on a hill were taking aim at him and other family members.

Yes, the infamous fictional snipers that Bundy says were there, but I tend to find everything he says questionable and no articles mention the presence of snipers until after the stand off started (except for the likes of infowars) sooooo

Infowars was being mocked at first for even saying anything was happening down there.

**LordofHats**

Relapse wrote:
Infowars was being mocked at first for even saying anything was happening down there.

And a broken clock is right twice a day

**Relapse**

Frazzled wrote:
Also to keep from selling firearms to drug cartels.

Ah, yes. Fast and Furious. Another shining moment.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

LordofHats wrote:
Relapse wrote:
Infowars was being mocked at first for even saying anything was happening down there.

And a broken clock is right twice a day

Aha! You admit they were right!

Just havin' fun with you on that 'un. I don't really pay much attention myself to it.

**LordofHats**

Relapse wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Also to keep from selling firearms to drug cartels.

Ah, yes. Fast and Furious. Another shining moment.

Don't forget that whole boondoggle following the passage of the Assault Weapons ban where some ATF guys decided they could start confiscating guns ex post facto and kicked off the entire militia movement in the US (Yes BLM, I'm saying you can blame ATF for that gak

)

**Relapse**

LordofHats wrote:
Relapse wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Also to keep from selling firearms to drug cartels.

Ah, yes. Fast and Furious. Another shining moment.

Don't forget that whole boondoggle following the passage of the Assault Weapons ban where some ATF guys decided they could start confiscating guns ex post facto and kicked off the entire militia movement in the US (Yes BLM, I'm saying you can blame ATF for that gak )

I have to go to work, but later, I have a some stories to tell about the local militia that tried to recruit me.

**d-usa**

Breotan wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Are the same people that always scream "we need guns because cops can't be anywhere and cops have no mandate to protect anybody anyway" now saying "people don't need guns, just call the damn cops"?
Only if you take everything we said completely out of context and make up your own version of events. However, if you actually take what we said in context, you'd note that we're saying GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, not private citizens, don't need separate police forces when they already have the FBI. But, please, continue stuffing your strawman. With all the dead cattle out there, there's plenty of unused straw available.

People can either protect themselves by relying on separate police agencies or they can't.

It's not really that damn complicated.

If people don't need guns, then people don't need guns.

Why do you need guns when you already have a separate city police department, why cops when you have sheriffs, why sheriffs when you have state police, why state police when you have the FBI?

**Frazzled**

Relapse wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
Relapse wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Also to keep from selling firearms to drug cartels.

Ah, yes. Fast and Furious. Another shining moment.

Don't forget that whole boondoggle following the passage of the Assault Weapons ban where some ATF guys decided they could start confiscating guns ex post facto and kicked off the entire militia movement in the US (Yes BLM, I'm saying you can blame ATF for that gak )

I have to go to work, but later, I have a some stories to tell about the local militia that tried to recruit me.

I was chased by a village mob with pitchforks and torches once. They had me confused with some guy named Manster. They kept saying "look! its ze Manster!"

**Manchu**

Seaward wrote:
Except that it does work, where law enforcement is concerned.

Indeed. Not sure what is LoH's evidence proving otherwise ... something about the Articles of Confederation?

The point I am making is an easy point. There is or ought to be a clear conceptual difference between police and other government agencies. In practice, however, that line is blurred by arming non-police agencies. I am not convinced that they are armed because their mandate absolutely requires it. It seems to me that they are armed to circumvent the political problem of having to coordinate with (federal and state) police agencies.

**d-usa**

What current federal agency is tasked with enforcing the law for all other agencies?

It certainly isn't the FBI.

**Manchu**

As far as I know, there isn't one. This is probably because the dramatic expansion of federal authority since the 1930s but especially since the 1950s has blurred the line between "executive" and "police" all along the way and done such a thorough job of it that even intelligent people like LoH need to be reminded there is a difference.

**whembly**

WarOne wrote:
dogma wrote:
Captain Avatar wrote:

Ok. You choose to intentionally ignore/side step your use of racist elitist language for attempt at casual dismissal. Consider yourself reported.

In what way is "red neck" a racist term?

Is "poor, white conservative" a race now?

They're a repressed, discriminated minority now.

Liberals charge them extra for sugary drinks, limit their ability to buy and use guns, and discourage praying while participating in government.

Truly we have regressed. *sarcasm*

Oh have an exalt for that! Sprayed my drink over my keyboard this morning.

**Breotan**

I don't have an issue with BLM having dedicated arson investigators, fire safety inspectors, and so forth. Dealing with wildfires is fundamental to their job. I do have a problem with them having a dedicated paramilitary wing.

In New York City, the fire Marshal's are tied at the hip to the NYPD. The Marshal's do detective work (arson) and can even make arrests but if they ever need a tactical response team, they get the NYPD guys - they don't have they're own. In Pennsylvania, the state police have taken over the fire marshal's job and duties. Isolated examples, but they show there really isn't any practical reason Congress couldn't do the same with the FBI and all the other government agencies.

**Alpha 1**

Yeah but the difference there is the NYPD is one if not the largest Police force in the world something like 35000 officers that is a small army, not to mention they are well funded, trained and equipped to handle those situations. The BLM more than likely deal with much smaller communities with police forces that do not have the funding, equipment or training to handle something like the Bundy case and what is more important is that the Police might not be impartial to the situation and even support the suspect and relying on these officer could put BLM agents in danger.