And there's the rub, because with little to no transparency into how local law enforcement decides when to use SWAT, I can't prove you wrong or right. I can only offer conjecture and opinion.

I'm not sure what your point is here, since the 12:1 ratio quoted did not include traffic fatalities.

Just because we're in a unique situation doesn't mean there's no room for analysis and improvement. If departments would share policies and statistics, the guys with the big brains could likely figure out what works well and what doesn't.

Maybe this happens here and there, but on a national level? I'm pretty sure the answer is no, and I would enjoy being proven wrong.

By who? Us? Here?

This is a bunch of poker players who've got their panties in a wad that all police aren't out solving "real" crime (i.e. not poker) instead of busting poker games.

If you run an illegal business, there's a good chance that someday the police are going to show up at your door -- and sometimes, they're going to bring the tank.



From our Sheriff to your crack house.

youmadbro.jpg

I misread the original post.

I stand by my statement that it's impossible to blame 12:1 on the "increasing militarization of our police force" boogeyman, however, since there's no control group.

Separately, I'll tell my opinion is that point-blank that the PCSO needs a highly-trained, highly-armed segment of their police force. They're fighting on the front lines of some nasty ****.

I think there is some wadding going on both sides of this argument. People are quite in their rights to question whether this was a good use of police force, just as you are within your rights to support it. Both sides without all of the facts.

You posted that you are not saying the police are infallible, but aside from that, your every post says you have concluded that they made no error.

Arpaio is EXACTLY the sort of idiot who should be kept very far away from ANYTHING resembling heavy weapons. Barney Fife's dumber cousin.

Compare the two statements:

The Arizona Cardinals are infallible.
The Arizona Cardinals did not commit a penalty on the previous play.

---
I believe, strongly, that you can't just sit on the porch and politely wait for the to-be-busted to open the door and allow you to search while you believe A CRIME TO BE IN PROGRESS on the other side of the door, and while evidence of said crime might be being destroyed/altered/hidden.

I further believe that based on underwhelming lack of information regarding the original Orlando bust, that there's no reason to point and should and yell about how SWAT wasn't necessary. You don't know. I don't know. I'm going to give the police the benefit of the doubt -- especially when they're out enforcing the laws that the citizens of the great state of Florida want enforced -- in these cases.

I also believe, based on everything I've read about Jose Guerena, that the police were absolutely right to use a highly armed team when serving his warrant. His entire family was moving drugs, and based on what I know about moving high volumes of pot in my home state, that's cartel business. They didn't find a US Border Patrol hat in his room because he liked to play dress-up.

So, in these cases, yes. I believe there was no penalty on the play. A couple rough hits, for sure -- maybe even worthy of sending to the league office for review -- but no penalty on the play.

--

Finally, if the people who're upset about poker raids spent half the time collecting signatures for legislative change as they spent pretending it actually bothered them on the internet, the laws would have changed by now.

As I wrote before, I give them the benefit of the doubt, too.

All I am saying is, while there have been a lot of knee jerk posts against the police, your posts have been knee jerk in support. If you can't see that, you are not reading yourself very carefully.

Why? Because you live here and have context, or because he's controversial an easy target for the media who put him under a microscope?

Tent city?
Pink underwear?
Green baloney?
Racism?
Chain gangs?


They make for great headlines in the national media.

It's an elected position, and he's been in office for 20 years now. Any thoughts as to why we keep him, even in a state that's only 57% non-Hispanic white if he's such an incompetent racist?

Other than ranting that Jose Guerena was a criminal, and not some defenseless victim of a botched raid, I'll gladly submit to you identifying something that's knee-jerk about my responses, and not simply counter to other people knee-jerking.

If you scream, OMG! WTF SWAT, it's not knee-jerk for me to tell you you're the crazy one, that police have protocol, and you're just guessing.

Palimax, enjoy your servitude. Sheriff Joe thanks you for your support.

Shame, since this was a chance to engage in discussion about Sheriff Joe with people who actually live here in Maricopa county. There's a lot of us here, some transplanted, some long-term natives. The readers of this thread might have enjoyed learning something other than what you see then the media talks about pink underwear.

All available evidence to the contrary.

I don't see many panties in wads. I see people having a discussion, considering opinions, and even altering viewpoints.

What's interesting to me is that a Second Amendment advocate seems to be knee-jerking against the kind of discussion which the Amendment exists to support.

Go make another two hour long dozen post rant about how much you don't want to talk to me.