Intoxicated SWAT Detective ARRESTED (with machine-gun and tactical gear)

[Vaquero]

You shouldn't have guns in your car.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

It's not illegal for officers to drink while carrying weapons.
It is however illegal for them to drive while intoxicated.
The fact that he was in an unmarked unit at night makes me believe that he was "on the job".

 

[leVieux]

Difficult to watch.

Our Kid is a Detective / ATF Liaison Officer.

leVieux

 

[Bithabus]

Was this in CA? Well then that .....doesn't change a thing. Honestly I think you are going overboard with the "higher class of citizen". What does that even mean? Doctors write scripts and attorneys can issue subpoenas. You want that higher class too? You used the word peon, not me. If that is how you see yourself because you lack powers of arrest..... He is held to a higher standard and I already explained how that works.

The article said he was suspended, not fired. Not held to a higher standard. As long as the 2nd amendment rights of cops are infringed less than everyone else we will have this us vs them BS. It hurts everyone.

 

[Moonpie]

Can you guess what cops would do to me if I blew .00001 over the limit?
Can you guess what my employer would to me if this occurred in a company owned vehicle. While on the job.
Go ahead. I'll wait.

 

[EZ-E]

The company I work for gave a guy 3 times before they fired him. It's hard to get fired from there... they dont like to pay unemployment.

 

[sharkey]

You shouldn't have guns in your car.

I don't follow. Do you have a gun in your car? I have a gun in my car. Of course, I had a couple guns in my squad.

 

[sharkey]

The article said he was suspended, not fired. Not held to a higher standard. As long as the 2nd amendment rights of cops are infringed less than everyone else we will have this us vs them BS. It hurts everyone.

Uh yeah, they suspend you before they fire you. They like to call it indefinite suspension. Honestly you are not even making sense about the 2A and infringement. It is a definite us vs them mentality here though. I guess as a peon you don't realize that the smg does not belong to the officer. Some agencies allow the smgs to go in a Tactical officer's kit. We did not but I still had a MP5 on call outs.

Geez, you'll are like little brats that didn't get what they wanted for Christmas (Wahhhh, I don't get to carry a smg so why does this drunk get one). Maybe I missed it, did you answer my other questions? I guess since this is the Class III section you can focus on what the officer had as far as weapons go but like for the third time, it is not relevant to his DWI charge.

 

[sharkey]

Can you guess what cops would do to me if I blew .00001 over the limit?
Can you guess what my employer would to me if this occurred in a company owned vehicle. While on the job.
Go ahead. I'll wait.

Why guess, just tell us. So if you are over the limit by just a bit that is like OK? I guess I missed that in the Penal Code. Can you show me where that is? Well of course we know what would happen if you drive a company car. No guessing needed but how many here protesting drive a company vehicle. I do by the way just for the record.

 

[Bithabus]

Uh yeah, they suspend you before they fire you. They like to call it indefinite suspension. Honestly you are not even making sense about the 2A and infringement. It is a definite us vs them mentality here though. I guess as a peon you don't realize that the smg does not belong to the officer. Some agencies allow the smgs to go in a Tactical officer's kit. We did not but I still had a MP5 on call outs.

So did they fire him or not? You claimed they did.

I'm aware the SMG was not his personal property. But the agency (and our govt) thought this person was responsible enough to be trusted with a weapon that most citizens can never dream of owning. And then he got wasted and had to have his windows smashed out. Ant-gun Statists believe the Police should have weapons because they are more trained, more "professional", more trustworthy. Incidents like this are important because they illustrate the falseness and depravity of that thinking.

 

[Bithabus]

Wahhhh, I don't get to carry a smg so why does this drunk get one

Precisely! I'm glad you see the problem.

 

[deemus]

Can you guess what cops would do to me if I blew .00001 over the limit?
Can you guess what my employer would to me if this occurred in a company owned vehicle. While on the job.
Go ahead. I'll wait.

If you have a machine gun, in your car while driving drunk? You would never see you weapon again. As I understand it, if you have any gun while driving drunk, you are in deep do-do.

CHL gone

Gun gone?

License status, I guess depends on how many you've had. I know a guy who did several years in prison for DWI after already having several.

 

[deemus]

The company I work for gave a guy 3 times before they fired him. It's hard to get fired from there... they dont like to pay unemployment.

You don't collect unemployment if you get fired for cause.

 

[sharkey]

So did they fire him or not? You claimed they did.

I'm aware the SMG was not his personal property. But the agency (and our govt) thought this person was responsible enough to be trusted with a weapon that most citizens can never dream of owning. And then he got wasted and had to have his windows smashed out. Ant-gun Statists believe the Police should have weapons because they are more trained, more "professional", more trustworthy. Incidents like this are important because they illustrate the falseness and depravity of that thinking.

I dunno what they did but from past history with this, they first suspend you (officers usually have some type of association or union) and then that turns to indefinite suspension, ie termination.

As for the rest of your post, it has nothing to do with his arrest. I have never said police should only have a SMG so don't lump me as a Statist. What I am trying to provide is insight from a LEO perspective but you and others just poo poo the reply. It is almost like you want this guy flogged. Tactical officers need specialized weapons to do their job. It is not my problem if you can't grasp that and want to whine about how you don't have a SMG.
DWI is a non bias across the board crime that folks from every profession have been guilty of. So if you got convicted of DWI and could never continue in your profession, would that be fair? That is what happened to this guy. What more do you want?

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[ZX9RCAM]

In my opinion, which is not worth squat, there is a huge difference between getting a DWI while off duty on own time, and while on duty in a patrol vehicle.

 

[EZ-E]

You don't collect unemployment if you get fired for cause.

Correct ... i was just saying my company is hard to get fired from...mainly because they dont like paying unempolment or confirtations.

 

[Bithabus]

What more do you want?

I want equal rights for all citizens.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

I want equal rights for all citizens.

That wouldn't be fair.
Some are more equal than others....