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.

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/snipers-target-cops-during-dallas-protest-over-police-shootings/20160708.htm


A bit more on the facts surrounding the situation. Just unbelievable.

 Breotan wrote:
Here is an article written by a former police office who is African-american. It is an interesting read about how race affects policing.
http://www.vox.com/2015/5/28/8661977/race-police-officer

To be fair that is also sometimes actual orders in any closed group like police or military. You can't publicly say anything against the orders of the patrol/group leader while on the job, since confronting him about it will lessen his authority and by extension the organisation's. And newbies aren't always even told how to handle a situation where they'd have to stop a sarge etc going off the rails. Because obviously someone making patrol leader would never be in error...

I had one such incident while serving my mandatory army time. Gate guard duty, some Lt walks by and tells me about a sporting event for people with eyesight disabilities and that X number of civvies will be arriving to the garrison's officer housing area. I ofc call it in to get confirmation (random Lts can't give me orders on guard duty) and later get a new visit from the Lt who chews me out for doing exactly my duty. In the evening there's a civvy wandering about in an area he shouldn't be (not a "you'll get shot at" area but still off-limits without permission). My MP patrol sarge had just woken up and knew nothing about what had happened that day but picked me and another guy to back him up. We found the errant civilian very fast - obviously not blind but with very thick glasses - who claimed a wrong turn when coming from the officer's club in the dark and the sarge rather rudely ordered the guy to walk ahead of our jeep instead of listening to me. Only in the car did he listen to me, then had us pick up the guy and drive him to the housing area he should be in. We were armed and led by a 20 or so old guy who thought this could be a dangerous criminal, and I couldn't tell him what I knew before out of earshot. Luckily for everyone involved this ended without anyone getting beaten or having a gun pointed at him.

 d-usa wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Would he have been due for a Good Conduct Medal after 5 years, or is the time frame different for Reserves?

No. You only get it for active duty. Time in the Reserves does not count.

He might have gotten the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal, it's every 3 years, but he'd also have to be recommended by his unit commander. It's not automatic.

Wrong. I was awarded a good Conduct medal during my time in the Marine Reserves.

Maybe it's harder to find well behaved marines, so they get rewarded more?

We keep our honor clean.

Asterios wrote:

 Smacks wrote:

 redleger wrote:
Since you seem to continue to want to go in this direction

I was actually content to let the subject rest, as you suggested. I was dragged back in by another poster. You have been very gracious and diplomatic in your responses, and I appreciate that. I apologise for continuing the discussion.

I will ask the direct question, please give a direct answer. How do you recommend people protect themselves from those with no regard for the law, societal customs, regulations, and are ok with doing violence on soft and easy targets?

I think if someone is in immediate mortal peril, then I would recommend they defend themselves by whatever means necessary. However, that is actually not what I was talking about. It is not the gun that I object to, but the rhetoric of fear that goes along with it, and the normalisation and acceptance of violence.

or maybe it is better to have it and not need it then to not have it and need it?/

Still missing the point. If you'd rather have your gun and have a 10%* chance of being shot to death by a burglar than not having a gun and having a 5%* chance of being shot to death by a burglar because society got its collective thumbs out of its collective behind then more power to you.

*Figures used for ilustrative purposes only.

 CptJake wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
This is allegedly the perp's 'like' or group memberships on facebook. If accurate it may give an indication as to what he considered his motivating factors.

https://archive.is/AWhWZ

(was shown the link, no idea how accurate it really is)

There's no point posting it then.

Better than speculation he is a white supremacist long after we know he isn't...

And it ends up that is his facebook 'likes'.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

A military lawyer says the man who fatally shot five officers in Dallas was accused of sexual harassment by a female solider when he served in the Army in Afghanistan in May 2014.
Lawyer Bradford Glendening says Micah Johnson was sent back to the U.S. with the recommendation he be removed from the Army with an "other than honorable" discharge.
Glendening, who represented Johnson at the time, said Friday that the recommendation was "highly unusual" since generally counseling is ordered before more drastic steps are taken.
Glendening said Johnson was set to be removed from the Army in September 2014 because of the incident. Instead, Johnson got an honorable discharge the following April — for reasons Gardening doesn't understand.

http://wnyt.com/news/the-latest-dallas-police-trying-to-sort-through-shooting/4193275/

Probably explains why he was an E3 with as much time as he had and why no ETS award.

 CptJake wrote:

Probably explains why he was an E3 with as much time as he had and why no ETS award.

That he was allowed an honorable discharge seems a bit odd.



In other attacks on police this weekend so far....

Tennessee has already been mentioned.

In Missouri on Friday, a police officer was shot from behind after he walked back to his patrol car to check the driving status of a black man who he had stopped. Antonio Taylor, 31, was later arrested but the motive for the shooting is unknown

In Georgia on Friday, an officer was shot after he responded to a call from a man who said his car had been broken into. Again the motive is unknown

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

Probably explains why he was an E3 with as much time as he had and why no ETS award.

That he was allowed an honorable discharge seems a bit odd.

Not really. Once out of theater and out from under the watch of the commander who initiated the action, some crap bag CONUS took the easy way out rather than do the hard right. I've seen it before, way too often. Bad troop yells 'EEO' and/or does a congressional inquiry and the command folds like a blanket.

Just to remind people, this thread is not about gun control it is about the regrettable events in Dallas.

 CptJake wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

Probably explains why he was an E3 with as much time as he had and why no ETS award.

That he was allowed an honorable discharge seems a bit odd.

Not really. Once out of theater and out from under the watch of the commander who initiated the action, some crap bag CONUS took the easy way out rather than do the hard right. I've seen it before, way too often. Bad troop yells 'EEO' and/or does a congressional inquiry and the command folds like a blanket.

This, unless the command is willing to put in the time and effort, of which there is a lot required, then its easier to let the Soldier expire his term of service and go on his crappy way.

 redleger wrote:

This, unless the command is willing to put in the time and effort, of which there is a lot required, then its easier to let the Soldier expire his term of service and go on his crappy way.

*sigh*

The US military has been borrowing way too heavily from the civilian side of government. We've got one still on the books at our facility who should have been dismissed 130 odd days ago for her current status as a prison inmate.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 redleger wrote:

This, unless the command is willing to put in the time and effort, of which there is a lot required, then its easier to let the Soldier expire his term of service and go on his crappy way.

*sigh*

The US military has been borrowing way too heavily from the civilian side of government. We've got one still on the books at our facility who should have been dismissed 130 odd days ago for her current status as a prison inmate.

It happens all the time. My last unit, we had two people that we tried to forcibly separate. Both times the Commander just shuffled them somewhere else, to make them someone else's problem. Hate that crap.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36755495

Obama is in Poland. So how the hell is he hip deep in De Nile?

 BaronIveagh wrote:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36755495

Obama is in Poland. So how the hell is he hip deep in De Nile?

I don't think he's wrong, although in my opinion we're slipping in the wrong direction. Look how much of an outlier an event like this was, and compare it to how many bombings were performed by the Weathermen alone, for example. I don't think we're slipping back to Jim Crow laws, either - I do think that voter ID laws are aimed at disenfranchising people but not strictly on racial grounds, but by voting factions. That's a whole other thread so I don't want to pull that string, but I mean, compare that to the institutionalized racism of the 60s - segregated housing, George Wallace in the schoolhouse door... gak, there were still lynchings in the 60s.

 Ouze wrote:
gak, there were still lynchings in the 60s.

Um.... I hate to be the one that tells you this but there have been alleged lynchings as recently as Tuesday.

A bad police shoot is not a lynching. Of course, I'm sure you already know that so I'm not sure why we're doing what we're now doing.

I think he is referring to the black man found dead in a park in Atlanta, hanged by the neck from a tree.

 Manchu wrote:
I think he is referring to the black man found dead in a park in Atlanta, hanged by the neck from a tree.

Probably would have helped if he included a link to the story instead of posting it as a throwaway comment.

A quick Google seems to indicate the event as a suicide.

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/atlanta/police-release-report-on-man-found-hanging-in-piedmont-park/392489776
http://www.atlantaga.gov/index.aspx?page=672&recordid=4597
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/police-body-found-in-piedmont-park-a-suicide-victi/nrtJq/

I had head it was referred to the FBI, likely as a sop to those with an interest in fomenting further unrest.

That was on Thursday, and indeed what has been reported seems consistent with suicide. But of course if more evidence comes out I will correct my statement.

well it seems one city has learned from Dallas, by closing up the Capitol during a BLM rally, but it makes one wonder why the rally now if no one there to protest too?

http://fox40.com/2016/07/08/california-capitol-to-close-for-black-lives-matter-rally/

So I read today that yesterday there was a police officer shot by a black man here in Tennessee, after responding to him shooting 3 other white people on a highway, killing one of them.

That makes 15 police officers targeted and shot in a 24 hour period, by my count. 12 in Dallas, 1 in St. Louis, 1 in Atlanta, and 1 in TN. Anyone hear of anymore stories?

 djones520 wrote:
So I read today that yesterday there was a police officer shot by a black man here in Tennessee, after responding to him shooting 3 other white people on a highway, killing one of them.

That makes 15 police officers targeted and shot in a 24 hour period, by my count. 12 in Dallas, 1 in St. Louis, 1 in Atlanta, and 1 in TN. Anyone hear of anymore stories?

Aside from those instances you mentioned thankfully not. The Dallas incident does bring back memories of the two LEOs ambushed in New York a few years ago

The good thing is that as long as violent crime continues to go down, there really isn't any reason to pass any kind of laws or to change our policies just because of a few mass shootings.

 d-usa wrote:
The good thing is that as long as violent crime continues to go down, there really isn't any reason to pass any kind of laws or to change our policies just because of a few mass shootings.

In the event that you are serious what laws would you like to see passed that would have prevented this?

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
The good thing is that as long as violent crime continues to go down, there really isn't any reason to pass any kind of laws or to change our policies just because of a few mass shootings.

In the event that you are serious what laws would you like to see passed that would have prevented this?

I know you asked D about this, but I would like to weigh in. I don't think any single piece of legislation, or even a group of reactionary laws, could've prevented what is the result of centuries of systematic and institutional persecution and disenfranchisement of blacks, the recent militarization of the police and whole other host of factors. This shooting is in many ways a symptom of America's incredibly flawed society and I doubt someone on a wargaming forum could give you a comprehensive answer as to how to correct it. I doubt anyone has a good single answer.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
The good thing is that as long as violent crime continues to go down, there really isn't any reason to pass any kind of laws or to change our policies just because of a few mass shootings.

In the event that you are serious what laws would you like to see passed that would have prevented this?

I know you asked D about this, but I would like to weigh in. I don't think any single piece of legislation, or even a group of reactionary laws, could've prevented what is the result of centuries of systematic and institutional persecution and disenfranchisement of blacks, the recent militarization of the police and whole other host of factors. This shooting is in many ways a symptom of America's incredibly flawed society and I doubt someone on a wargaming forum could give you a comprehensive answer as to how to correct it. I doubt anyone has a good single answer.

There are plenty of people who have solid pointers for what to replace society with but how is considerably more difficult to answer (or, if you're pessimistic, easy but depressing...).

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
The good thing is that as long as violent crime continues to go down, there really isn't any reason to pass any kind of laws or to change our policies just because of a few mass shootings.

In the event that you are serious what laws would you like to see passed that would have prevented this?

I know you asked D about this, but I would like to weigh in. I don't think any single piece of legislation, or even a group of reactionary laws, could've prevented what is the result of centuries of systematic and institutional persecution and disenfranchisement of blacks, the recent militarization of the police and whole other host of factors. This shooting is in many ways a symptom of America's incredibly flawed society and I doubt someone on a wargaming forum could give you a comprehensive answer as to how to correct it. I doubt anyone has a good single answer.

In terms of "police militarization" I read (can't remember where, there have been dozens of stories), that many of the Dallas police officers had chosen not to wear their PPE because of all of the concern about "militarization". They had left them behind, because they wanted to present that friendlier image...

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
The Dallas incident does bring back memories of the two LEOs ambushed in New York a few years ago

Pittsburgh in 09. Poplawski used the first two guys to respond as bait, trying to draw other cops in.

 djones520 wrote:
They had left them behind, because they wanted to present that friendlier image...

Next time just paint the AFV in cheery, kid friendly colors, and serve ice cream out of the back.

 BaronIveagh wrote:


Next time just paint the AFV in cheery, kid friendly colors, and serve ice cream out of the back.

Frankly, I can't see many objections to that.

evidently this incident has caused gun and Body Camera stocks to climb, can see Gun stocks going up but Body Camera?

http://fox40.com/2016/07/08/gun-and-body-camera-stocks-surge-after-dallas-shooting/