Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Thu Apr 25, 2024 2:28 pm

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 141 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
 Mpls SWAT Manages to Not Quite Kill Innocent Family 
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:54 am 
The Man
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:43 am
Posts: 7970
Location: Minneapolis MN
Jeremiah wrote:
Joel, if I didn't know better, I'd call you a cynical voter...


:wink:
Well, just a bit. Then again, I've got reasons -- when the business cards for the #2 guy at the union have his title as Consigliere . . .

_________________
Just a guy.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 8:30 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:37 pm
Posts: 1757
Location: Whittier
Quote:
Furthermore, I fear this settlement was from city insurance and no-one has learned anything (except perhaps the victim and perhaps his neighbors).


They have learned. If the media doesn't pick the story up & they can find some leverage to hold you hostage with, the Minneapolis City Attorney will run you into the ground in senseless, extra legal B.S. so that you won't have enough lawyer funds to afford justice.

We were hit a couple days earlier than the Khangs on another botched raid, but you didn't hear about it in the media. Yeah, MPD learned from their mistakes . . . they have to work much harder on supressing the innocent, to avoid paying for their mistakes.

_________________
Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a
lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become
a law unto himself; it invites anarchy .” Olmstead v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 9:04 am 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:54 am
Posts: 2444
Location: West Central MN
The current attitude, even with good cops, toward lawsuits is "Bring it on."
I was joking with an LEO friend not long ago.

He was telling a group of us about entering a hidden underground "house" that a someone had built on public property. As things go, it was pretty elaborate, had a working fireplace etc. Some kids had found the opening and the county had it checked and caved in, and the police figured out who occasionally lived there. No crimes committted.

I joked about his not having a warrrant for entering a "homestead", maybe the "resident" was entitled to sue and get money for a real house..... :lol:


Anyway, the automatic response was:


"We welcome lawsuits, love em. We get free attorneys and get paid for our time, and the county and city insurance pays for everything. It just shows we are doing our job."

"We're not intimidated by lawsuits, we've got good lawyers too, and it's free to us."


That is the general attitude cops are learning, from what I can see. "We're right even when we're wrong, people are all sue-happy, lawyers are just greedy, judges are just idiots, screw em."

If taxpayers are tired of paying for these lawsuits against the police , they can rein in the lawyers and judges, but not the cops, is the attitude.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:36 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:37 pm
Posts: 1757
Location: Whittier
That is basically what I am hearing from MPD.

My lawyer costs money, there's doesn't so thety can jerk me around until I can't afford to get jerked around anymore and then I will have to quit, roll over and take it like a good little taxpayer.

The impunity from consequences is mind boggling. Absolutely no oversite, no consequences, no reason for internal affairs to even exist. Might be easier on the taxpayers to put a shelf next to a trashcan, the shelf can hold blank complaint forms and the trashcan can hold the filed ones, no sense paying a living cop to do what furniture could do so well.

All I want is my property back, I don't even really want to sue. The Minneapolis City Attorney is so afraid of actually having to pay (more) out though that they can't admit they made a mistake and just return the property.

_________________
Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a
lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become
a law unto himself; it invites anarchy .” Olmstead v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mpls SWAT Manages to Not Quite Kill Innocent Family
PostPosted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:32 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:54 am
Posts: 5270
Location: Minneapolis
Vang Khang, when the fourth amendment didn't protect him, at least the second did.

(I just made that up)

_________________
I am defending myself... in favor of that!


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mpls SWAT Manages to Not Quite Kill Innocent Family
PostPosted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:37 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:09 am
Posts: 1060
Location: Savage, MN
DeanC wrote:
Vang Khang, when the fourth amendment didn't protect him, at least the second did.

(I just made that up)


Nice, but it sure took you a while.
:lol:


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 141 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 111 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group