|
|
| Post Number: 11
|
GEOKARJO 
Google This!!!
Group: Members
Posts: 7799
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
 |
Posted on: Feb. 19 2004,3:21 pm |
|
   |
I sat and listened to the workshop.Yes this item was overlooked during his budget preparation.
Therefore a decision had to be made where the money was coming from if anymore money would be needed. MANY ALTERNATIVES WERE DISCUSSED SUCH AS CUTBACKS of squads and retaining older cars.
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 12
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 19 2004,4:11 pm |
|
 |
Who said anything about being a "hero"? Look back at the post--some things I support--defibrillators--I don't think there is any reason NOT to have them in the squads--and units that are compatible with the AL Police and ambulance services so the patient can be switched right into the ambulance. I believe they were partly paid for with a grant that Belshan was working on. I don't believe there was County money in them--Harig asked for donations from Service clubs. Do you think they are worthwhile?
I questioned the drug dog--I think the City and County could have shared a dog--and checked with the AL Police officers that shared handling of the dog--both confirmed it was no problem for the dog to mind either officer. Harig didn't use public money for the dog--once again, he raised money from private donations--for the dog, the training, and even some of the operational costs. I can see why you don't want the dog  (but then, you don't have to worry about a Freeborn County German Shepard coming to your front door if you live in Austin) --but from a fiscal standpoint, no money spent.
I disagreed with the need for high-powered automatic weapons--the last thing we need is for full-auto fire with a range of a mile sprayed around--the reason that most big-city cops use riot guns--powerful, lethal, but only at short range.
I agreed that the County could use one 4-wheel drive vehicle--off-road searches--chases--storms--big snowfalls. The difference between an Explorer and a Crown Vic squad car is minimal.
I disagreed on the motorcycle--no public funds, but raises ethics questions.
Cars--the leases are up--what would you have him do? HE didn't sign on for the cars, that was before his time--I would hope that all the cars they are talking about leasing wouldn't come up at the same time again.
I agreed with him on 2 issues--disagreed on 3, and gave him a pass on 1 that wasn't his doing--how does that make him a "hero"?
What would YOU have done on each of these issues? Be specific.
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 13
|
minnow
Group: Members
Posts: 2243
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 19 2004,5:42 pm |
|
|
Spent 12 months worth in 2 months. Need I really say more?
Those numbers speak loud and clear. Make no mistake about it, public officials should not be able to accept gifts, like the use of a new Harley. This is clearly wrong and this Sheriff is wrong for Freeborn County.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 14
|
MrTarzan
Group: Members
Posts: 564
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 19 2004,9:11 pm |
|
|
I am in complete agreement with jimhanson on all his points. I can't believe he was allowed to take a gratuity like the motorcycle, it does not seem right. By the way, how did the deputy shoot his car, during the shootout with the bank robber? If so, he is excused. If it was showing his gun to a woman like Barney Fife, then that is funny.  How did the budget get spent so fast? And GEOKARJO, what are you talking about? What items were these that were on the agenda? What things did he forget to put in the budget? Why is this not in the Tribune? Did he really spend 12 months in 2? Is minnow telling the truth?
--------------
Be not simply good, be good for something-Henry David Thoreau
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 15
|
rat_squad
Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 19 2004,11:45 pm |
|
|
Jim makes some good points about Harig.
However the "high-powered automatic weapons" that the Sheriff’s Office has purchased are single action only rifles. The rifles are an AR-15 variant that only fire single action. They are chambered in the .223 caliber. Yes this caliber has a long range, but there are several other calibers with a much longer range.
Harig has applied for government surplus M-16’s which are fully automatic weapons. But they have a selector switch which allows them to be fired in either “full auto” or “semi-auto”. But the county has only applied for these weapons and who knows how long the federal government will take to release these weapons. Also, these weapons can only be obtained in limited numbers.
Another thing to keep in mind is that most law enforcement agencies use frangible ammunition in their long range weapons. Frangible ammo breaks apart on impact, not allowing it to over penetrate its target. Not a completely safe bullet, but safer.
I assume the “riot guns” that Jim talks about are shotguns. Shotguns do play an important role in law enforcement. They are another tool. They offer limited range, where a rifle offers a longer range.
“Most big-city cops” not only carry shotguns in their patrol vehicles, but they also carry either a semi or full auto rifle. The Minnesota State Patrol is one such agency.
It should also be noted that many agencies also have a third weapon in their patrol vehicles. Many agencies have a close quarters weapon at there disposal. Normally an MP-5, this weapon is used for building entries and for other tactical purposes. An MP-5 is much shorter and a less cumbersome weapon in a cramped, close quarter situation. The MP-5 is chambered in a handgun round. However these weapons are several thousand dollars and are cost prohibitive for smaller agencies.
All of the weapons that I have discussed are legitimate law enforcement weapons and are in use in many law enforcement agencies around the world. Each weapon has its specific role and purpose. Think what you want of Harig. But, don’t limit the safety of Harig’s Deputies by not giving them the tools they need to do their job.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 16
|
Liberal
Group: Moderator
Posts: 11451
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 20 2004,8:56 am |
|
|
Why would anyone relocate a business or open a new business in any small county where the deputies feel the need to carry AR-15 assault rifles in their cars for protection. It would certainly make you wonder about the amount of violent crime that goes on in the county and you'd have to wonder why they need all the fire power.
I can't imagine living in a place where law enforcement needs an MP5 submachine guns to enforce the law.
Attached Image
--------------
The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 17
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 20 2004,9:26 am |
|
|
Regarding Harig's requests for increased arms. I'm a hunter and target shooter and ex-military. I'm generally in favor of adequate arms for police. I have no problem with semi-auto AR-15s--they are no different than any other semi-auto .223 hunting rifle. I do question the need--and the public safety of full-auto M-16s carried in squad cars Have some locked up back at the cop shop for use in hostage situations, etc. by a trained swat team--yeah, I'd go along with that--although for a situation requiring a trained swat team, you probably are going to have outside help. I don't ever recall a situation where there was the need to put out all the lead from a full-auto weapon--or that needs the RANGE of a long-range flat trajectory of a .223. If you need that kind of range, you'd better have a hunting/sniper rifle capable of putting the shot where you need it, rather than an M16. An M-16 is not a real accurate weapon, but can put out a lot of lead--is this what we want in a civilian situation?
Frangible bullets? The skycops on airliners use them. Yes, they break apart on hitting solid objects, but are still lethal on tissue.
For years, police have relied on shotguns--often shortened for ease of getting in and out of patrol cars and in close-quarter situations (hence the term "riot gun"). The good news is that they are deadly at short range--don't require careful aim, have only a short range (we usually don't have to take out an offender at 350 metres)
One thing left off yesterdays discussion was the request for TASERs. These non-lethal weapons are meant to immobilize. I believe public safety is enhanced by the ability to use these less-than-lethal weapons. Harig went after alternative funding for these as well. Was there ANY county money in them?
Rat_squad--you sound like you know a lot about police weapons. What's your thoughts on "bean-bag" guns, rubber bullets, mace/pepper spray, and other less-than-lethal weapons?
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 18
|
rat_squad
Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 20 2004,3:43 pm |
|
|
Liberal you are right! It is sad that we don’t live in a perfect world. It would be nice if we did not have to worry about domestic terrorism. Unfortunately, it is a reality of living in a free county where you have the right to travel where you want without restrictions.
Just in the last year there had been two incidents in the county where law enforcement has been out gunned. I am sure you are all familiar with the stand-off with an active shooter that happened last spring. Where a lone gunman, with several weapons, held law enforcement at bay for several hours. In this incident not one shot was fired by law enforcement, other then a bean bag round. If law enforcement had a rifle, which offers a longer effective range, the perimeter could have been set up further away. Thus putting officers in a safer proximity to the scene.
The other incident would be the Freeborn Bank robbery. In this incident the initial two deputies had no chance. They were completely out gunned. They were facing a suspect with body armor and an automatic AK-47. The first deputy was only armed with a handgun. Handguns, in general, will not penetrate body armor. The second deputy was able to access a shotgun, but at the range he was positioned at buck shot is not a good round. That’s where a rifle would be the preferred weapon. It affords the shooter to take a long range shot and have confidence that it will hit what it is intended.
This sounds awfully familiar to the North Hollywood bank shootout, where law enforcement had to go to local gun shops to give them firepower to match the suspects. Not only to match the firepower of the suspects, but to penetrate body armor of the suspects.
That’s two incidents in less then a year that show that “it can happen” in your backyard. This is not just a Freeborn County trend. Look at Owatonna and Olmstead County. Both have recently had officer involved shootings. I assume you don’t limit the tools your use for your job. It is always best to use the right tool for the job. Why limit the tools that law enforcement has to do their job?
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 19
|
rat_squad
Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 20 2004,6:09 pm |
|
|
Jim I think we are on the same page on this issue. You are right frangible ammo is still meant to be lethal. The advantage is that if the round misses its target it will not penetrate through several walls. If the frangible ammo does hit its target it will most likely stay there and not pass through, potentially hitting someone else.
Another thing to keep in mind is that shotguns (with the exception of slugs) is that they fire several projectiles. The greater the range the greater the spread of the projectiles. This means it is harder (if not impossible) to keep all the projectiles on target at a greater range. With a rifle round you have great accuracy. Even an average shooter can keep a tight pattern (several inches) at a fairly long distance.
The other non-lethal weapons you have asked about are also important to law enforcement. Most in law enforcement prefer to call such weapons less then lethal. Even with these weapons you have described there is still the potential for a lethal result. But the likelihood of a lethal result is greatly reduced.
Most agencies already carry a pepper spray and some type of impact weapon. (Baton, PR-24, ASP) These have been around for decades and are widely accepted and widely used. They are also inexpensive compared to other alternatives.
Bean bag rounds are also becoming very common in law enforcement. They give you a less then lethal option. But they are not 100% effective. But in most cases, you still need cover from an armed officer, incase the bean bag round does not give the desired effect. Bean bag rounds are widely used on mentally disturbed people, because of the low likely hood of serious or permanent injury. But again these are a short range weapon.
Rubber bullets have been used by military and police around the world. I am not familiar with a recent incident where they have been used inside of the USA. They are not greatly safer then the real bullets and need to be fired from a greater range to insure they are used safely. At this time they are not a viable alternative for law enforcement in the US and I doubt that they ever will.
The TASER is another new weapon that has great promise. It disrupts the body’s electrical system and makes it impossible for an aggressive person to continue to resist. They are safe for people with pace makers and internal defibs. This is the only less lethal weapon where there are no known fatalities. But again this is a new weapon being deployed and the statistics are not as complete as other weapons that have been around for decades. The thing to keep in mind with today’s advanced TASER is that it is not the same weapon that Rodney King was shocked with. The Air Taser that was used then operated on a similar principle, but was greatly under powered and did not take advantage of today’s technologies.
Again these are all tool of the law enforcement trade. A carpenter does not limit himself to one saw for all jobs. A carpenter has several saws and uses the one best for the job. He maybe able to use a different saw but he will be less accurate/efficient and potentially less safe. The same goes for law enforcement. All of the weapons discussed over the last several days have a specific use. Law enforcement prefers to pick the best tool for the job and gets frustrated when it has to pick a tool that is not as safe to him or others when there is a better alternative out there.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 20
|
minnow
Group: Members
Posts: 2243
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 20 2004,7:01 pm |
|
|
Time out!
I'm calling foul. Rat Squad must be Harig himself...fitting name.
"Liberal you are right! It is sad that we don’t live in a perfect world. It would be nice if we did not have to worry about domestic terrorism. "
----->100% grade A bunk! Total fear mongering. Terrorism?! El Quida?! Give me a break...
You're simply using terrorism as an excuse to over arm yourselves. These weapons WILL NOT be used on brown people in turbans from some foriegn land Sheriff! 
They will be used on drunken Bubba when he has a fight with his spouse. They'll be used on Minnesotans...not some terrorist you knucklehead.
100% total and complete bunk. Bush tried that nonsense and he's all done and can only hope that you're done next election as well. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
