In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

The Killing Of America Ruby Ridge, Waco, Lubbock And Santa Clarita -?

Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
edited September 2001 in General Discussion
The Killing Of AmericaRuby Ridge, Waco, Lubbock And Santa Clarita -Santa Clarita?John Tarsikes, Jr., and Kathryn A. Graham 09.03.01
Well here we are again, sounding like a broken record ( record: a wax or vinyl disc once used to play music by inserting a needle in.well, you older folks know what we're talking about). What we mean is that we listened to the report of the attempted arrest of James Beck and heard the same old song once again. The warrant accused Beck of "stockpiling weapons." Suspect fired hundreds of shots at the beginning of the standoff. SWAT team officers surrounded the home and fired tear gas inside. Gas clouds billowed from second floor windows moments later, and the blaze burned for about 20 minutes before firefighters began battling the fire. Although there was some speculation that the tear gas may have ignited the fire, authorities believe Beck "started the blaze himself." BATF must have a set of press release forms that they pass out at these events which only require the name, time and date to be filled in, because the result is always the same! Note: BATF had a presence here. A neighbor who reported witnessing the initial contact with Beck by agents stated: "They started yelling at him to come outside. He came to the door and said he didn't want them to hurt his dog. They said, 'We don't care about the dog.' At that point, he kept repeating, `Don't hurt my dog.' ""He went back in the house and he closed his door. At that point they kept yelling at him to come out, and then his girlfriend came out through the garage. Officers then tried to knock down the door and gunfire erupted as officers started to go through a window."Ruby Ridge, Waco, Lubbock and a host of other incidents are very similar and all have resulted in the loss of life, loss of property and loss of faith in our government agencies. Years ago, we were taught in law enforcement classes never to give in, not to allow your authority to be questioned and that it was a sin to back down from a fight. This made for tough cops and that was what was needed years ago. But times have changed. The American public no longer has faith in their government agencies. They are tired of being pushed - pushed at work by multi-tasking, pushed on the streets by overcrowded highways, pushed in their homes by rising costs, interest rates, the IRS, and on and on . "Going Postal" is now a part of our language and culture. This must be taken into account by agents attempting to serve a warrant. Tactics need to be adopted that defuse a situation before it escalates into a shoot out. What could have been done to prevent the Santa Clarita incident? One of the SUSPECTED offenses reported to be included in the warrant was "stockpiling weapons." If we think a suspect is stockpiling weapons, why would we try to arrest him AT HOME WHERE THE WEAPONS ARE? Common sense should dictate that the arrest be made in a place remote from the house. Take the manpower wasted on SWAT and use it to follow the suspect until he stops in a place safe to make an arrest. Experience tells us it is much easier to grab a guy just as he gets out of his car, rather than letting him run in his house and get guns and ammo, and set up a barricade. SWAT team officers surrounded the home and fired tear gas inside. This seems to be a recurring theme. Next, the house burns down. Any competent policeman should see this as a possibility and avoid making the arrest at the suspect's HOME WHERE THE WEAPONS ARE! This saves lives - and a lot of money. It is cheaper just to book a suspect, rather than to have to fight fire, do autopsies, bury cops, and defend against civil suits. We would just follow the guy until the arrest could be made in a safe surrounding. Worst case? He could be armed with a concealed weapon, (not a whole basement full of who knows what that he could have at home) but we know this. In EVERY case like this we have investigated, neighbors report that the suspect was always seen walking around the neighborhood. Seems like it would be easier to take a suspect walking his dog or getting his mail, rather than to have to try to break into a barricaded house doesn't it? Officers use inflammatory attitude. In this case, officers reportedly had the suspect at his front door and should be able to make the arrest. A witness reports that Beck asked them not to hurt his dog. She stated that the officers said "We don't care about the dog." And that Beck kept saying "Don't hurt my dog." We think that this single phrase resulted in the deaths of the officer and suspect. What you say to people has more effect than what you do to them. There is a clinical term usually applicable to people hoarding weapons. Paranoid. Tell even a sane dog lover you don't care about their dog, and you get them riled. Try to harm it, and you are going to have to fight. If you are a cop making an arrest, "We don't care about the dog" translates to the suspect as "We don't care about you." You don't have to be paranoid - just scared - to break and run. What could have changed this outcome of the Beck case? By taking the time and effort to make the arrest away from the house. If the arrest just had to be made at his home.By nabbing the suspect as soon as he opened the door. Yelling at him was a waste of time, and it meant the officers were showing fear. There was a warrant. There was plenty of time to talk after the suspect was SAFELY in custody. Being named in an active warrant is not a CAPITAL OFFENSE! And if they just had to talk.By being empathetic. We firmly believe that the whole event would have ended satisfactorily had the officers just said something like "Hey, that's a fine dog. How about stepping outside so he won't get hurt. We have to take you, anyway, so why don't you tell us who to call to come get the dog until you bail out?" This talk reassures the suspect that you want the best for his pet, and therefore for him. It also changes the focus from his plight to making sure the dog is taken care of. By adding "Until you make bail" gives the suspect reassurance that his situation will not be permanent, and redirects his thoughts to thinking about who to call to make bond. All speaking should be done in a firm but understanding voice. Fear must not show. If you are scared, it scares the suspect. They worry how fear will make you react. The suspect is not surprised that you place him in handcuffs as soon as he comes out. He is not afraid of someone that is going to treat his pet right. He is already trying to figure out how to make bail. All of this tends to defuse the situation. These are all tried and proven tactics that are used 24/7 by small town officers who are usually alone when they have to serve warrants or make arrests. Most don't have SWAT to call, so they soon learn that being firm and empathetic at the same time gets the job done. Treating the suspect like a human being goes a lot farther than any bullet.Or fire.(John Tarsikes, Jr., and Kathryn A. Graham are joint owners of Safetynet Associates ) http://www.sierratimes.com/archive/files/sep/03/edjt090301.htm

Comments

  • LowriderLowrider Member Posts: 6,587
    edited November -1
    Following the suspect and arresting him without incident doesn't get agencies like the BATF the headlines they're after. They need sensational stuff to justify their existence. A quiet arrest also does nothing to promote the anti-gun agenda. They need the violent confrontation, the fire, and the destroyed evidence so they can lie about the facts and further convince the public that all gun owners are a bunch of short-fused bombs, just waiting to explode.
  • Mark IIMark II Member Posts: 247 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I disagree with a sentence in this article. "There is a clinical term usually applicable to people hoarding weapons: Paranoid." Real good. Now really, how many of us on this board can, by this definition, be called "clinically paranoid"? If this becomes commonly accepted, it won't be too long before it becomes just another law to be broken, like the "stockpiling weapons" law that was used in California.
    "To meet with ill fortune is to meet with good fortune. To meet with submission is to meet an enemy."
  • J.JohnJ.John Member Posts: 56 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    What would we read about in the paper and watch on TV if everybody meekly gave up? What happened to the dog?
  • XBEARXBEAR Member Posts: 2 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    JOSEY IF YOU WROTE THIS YOURSELF THAT WAS GREAT. SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE HAD SOME TRAINING AND LAW ENFORCEMENT UNDER YOUR SAM BROWN. AS A RETIRED LAWMAN I AGREE WITH YOU A HELL OF A LOT. I AMNOT GOING TO SAY ANYMORE, BUT I AM THINGING WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY ABOUT YOU KNOW WHO. GOOD WORK XBEAR
  • Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Bear,I would love to say I was the author however I was not.Many informative articles can be found at http://www.sierratimes.com
Sign In or Register to comment.