Quote from: GZire on November 22, 2011, 08:55:30 AM

Quote from: Cougar8045 on November 21, 2011, 07:33:15 PM

Quote from: pj_benn on November 21, 2011, 07:11:07 PM

You're giving them way too much credit. I know hpd that don't even know what kinda gun they carry and could care less about guns. Ive heard a federal policeman talk about how his co-workers didn't even know how to clear a gun, left the mag in and couldn't figure out why rounds kept coming out when he worked the slide. I've seen military armorers have negligent discharges because they didn't properly clear a pistol. I could go on and on. You can't assume just because someone carries that they know about stuff you know about. I'd be willing to bet there more gun owners who don't know who ayoob is then owners that do

You're right that a lot of gun owners don't know Massad Ayoob, a lot of cops and military are idiots, etc, but those cops that don't know which end the bullets come out of and the gun owners who haven't heard of Ayoob probably aren't carrying concealed when they're off-duty. I would respectfully submit that if a guy has a CCW, and hasn't done enough reading to have come across Ayoob, they're unprepared and need to get serious about the fact that they're walking around with a loaded gun strapped on.

Here's a link to what I was referring to: Massad Ayoob in Guns & Ammo

I'm with pj on this one.  HPD is required to carry a lot of the time.  Many of them do not know firearms, nor are they really interested.  To them firearms are just something that comes along with the job and much like filling out some paperwork, they just tolerate them because they have to.

I would hope that the standards for the Fed is higher than HPD, but I've also heard that HPD's training goes beyond a lot of what mainland departments do.  Pretty scary when you think about the guys walking around in the mainland with badges and firearms.

It's true enough that a lot of guys don't get the training they should.  All I'm saying is that Deedy refused the on-scene breathalyzer for one of two reasons: he was drunk, or he had been trained on what Massad Ayoob and many others teach, either at work or on his free time.  It could be either, but is assuming that a federal agent actually knew how to handle himself in the aftermath of a deadly force enounter so much more far-fetched than assuming that a federal agent decided to risk his career, life, and family in order to carry a firearm while drinking?

I understand why Deedy did and is continuing to do what he is in the aftermath.  Basically he's taking the 5th.

As far as drunk and carrying, yes I do think that guys would (and do) carry while drinking and under the influence.  You cannot employ as many people as the Fed/State/C&C without running afoul of the bad apple.  It's just not realistic.

FWIW in that situation, drinking or not, I'd think it's better not to submit to anything..........probably not even make a statement other than you want a lawyer.  The LEO's will probably hate you for it, but yes.......would suck to be working to pay someone when it's not your fault.

So i got a question kinda related.

If you ccw, are you required to step in and defuse situations, even though they are not particularly directed at you?

I know people in hawaii usually have the mind your own business kind of attitude.

If you are a LEO I would think you are required to step in.  If you are a regular guy, then no I don't believe you are.  However as Cougar has already stated and I am now............not a lawyer. 

One of the things you are taught at basic 1st Aid/CPR classes though is the general thought behind the good samaritan act.  It's basically this........you do not provide care beyond your training.  So you don't go in there with a knife and try and trach the guy if he isn't breathing unless you have that training.  If you do then you open yourself up to charges/lawsuits.  If you act within your training, then you are protected.

I would look at this in the same light.  The DA (at least in Hawaii) might look at this as if you have not received proper police training and by trying to address this type of situation and not backing off and calling the police..........trouble, unless of course you are in fear of your life/maiming/sodomy/rape.  Not really the case with Deedy.  I'm guessing the Eldert's lawyer is saying this wasn't life threatening, you should have just called the police.

In the case of Deedy, we also don't know his training.  Is he a former LEO?  Is he a former armed forces?  LEO and armed forces, not really the same thing in many cases.  Armed forces aren't police, the mission is different which is why it's kinda messed up to send all our guys across the oceans to act as police.  Also if he's primarily security, he may not be trained or their standard procedure might be to just eliminate the threat by either getting your guy out of Dodge or by stopping a threat.  A LEO would have a different view as stopping the threat if those around them are in immediate and life threatening danger, other than that they may be required to place themselves in much more danger by trying to talk someone down.

Anyhow...............yeah back to those tapes.  SA needs to sue to get a hold of them.

Quote from: bass monkey on November 22, 2011, 12:30:02 PM

So i got a question kinda related.

If you ccw, are you required to step in and defuse situations, even though they are not particularly directed at you?
I know people in hawaii usually have the mind your own business kind of attitude.

No. You are not REQUIRED to do anything.

+1 on this.

How the hell can they use those things as evidence?

Well from what Ive been told in relation to DUIs, I imagine the process would probably be somewhat similar for determining sobriety in other crimes. For portable breathalyzers like the ones police officers carry in the field, they are only used in conjunction with field sobriety tests as means to build up more probable cause to bring you in and give you a more accurate way of determining BAC.  The one that really counts is the breathalyzer at the police station, and there is an officer there that stays and watches you for a minimum of 20 minutes before administering the breathalyzer.  During that 20 min, youre not allowed to smoke, eat, drink, use the bathroom, or vomit at all.  If you do any of those, the 20 min waiting period starts all over again.

dont talk to cops part 1:



Part 2:

We need a dedicated thread for informative videos like these^

Quote from: pj_benn on November 22, 2011, 01:33:56 PM

How the hell can they use those things as evidence?

Well from what Ive been told in relation to DUIs, I imagine the process would probably be somewhat similar for determining sobriety in other crimes. For portable breathalyzers like the ones police officers carry in the field, they are only used in conjunction with field sobriety tests as means to build up more probable cause to bring you in and give you a more accurate way of determining BAC.  The one that really counts is the breathalyzer at the police station, and there is an officer there that stays and watches you for a minimum of 20 minutes before administering the breathalyzer.  During that 20 min, youre not allowed to smoke, eat, drink, use the bathroom, or vomit at all.  If you do any of those, the 20 min waiting period starts all over again.

They (the police) also have to maintain a maintance log and do regular (usually daily or every shift) QA testing to make sure the results are generally accurate. I used to have one we used in the ED and if the QA wasn't done, the results could be readily disputed in court.

As for the videos, the two shown are excellent educational pieces.....no one should talk to the police after an incident where you could be charged criminally....I don't fault the agent for not taking the test....I wouldn't have. And, in some of the initial reports they had Deedy described as "uncooperative" and I suspect that this was how they (HPD) described his refusal to talk and possibly incriminate himself....

We need a dedicated thread for informative videos like these^

"I told them not to talk!!!!"

Ha ha ha ha...........awesome.........

Quote from: fstbckgt on November 23, 2011, 06:09:26 AM

We need a dedicated thread for informative videos like these^

"I told them not to talk!!!!"

Ha ha ha ha...........awesome.........

I lol'd at that, too. 

The 911 tapes have apparently been released, but I haven't been able to find the actual audio anywhere.  Hawaii News Now ran this story with a transcript of one of the calls.

Interesting case. :-/ Not good for anyone, really. Those angry at the Fed now have another reason to be angry, those who resent being painted by that anger now have another reason to resent it. Gun rights advocates will want to cast it as self defense and a reason to can the "may issue" fallacy here while gun control advocates will cite it as yet more reason to keep guns off the streets.

I don't see this going well though I'm certainly not a lawyer.

First, is there any federal law or permit that allowed Deedy to ~legally~ carry a firearm while off duty in Hawaii?

Also, if Deedy was trying to break something up.... doesn't that make him the instigator of the altercation that led to his use of lethal self defense? In other words didn't he put himself in harms way? Given Hawaii's lovely "no one has guns in public" policy and Deedy wasn't at home or work, how could this be an easy case of self defense?

It isn't as bad as the Massie trail and I doubt he's going to get off with a pleasant hour of tea with the Governor. Still, its going to be hard to keep this case from being politically and racially charged. :(

Quote from: hillbilly19 on November 22, 2011, 11:49:47 PM

Quote from: pj_benn on November 22, 2011, 01:33:56 PM

How the hell can they use those things as evidence?

Well from what Ive been told in relation to DUIs, I imagine the process would probably be somewhat similar for determining sobriety in other crimes. For portable breathalyzers like the ones police officers carry in the field, they are only used in conjunction with field sobriety tests as means to build up more probable cause to bring you in and give you a more accurate way of determining BAC.  The one that really counts is the breathalyzer at the police station, and there is an officer there that stays and watches you for a minimum of 20 minutes before administering the breathalyzer.  During that 20 min, youre not allowed to smoke, eat, drink, use the bathroom, or vomit at all.  If you do any of those, the 20 min waiting period starts all over again.

They (the police) also have to maintain a maintance log and do regular (usually daily or every shift) QA testing to make sure the results are generally accurate. I used to have one we used in the ED and if the QA wasn't done, the results could be readily disputed in court.

HiCarry, we could talk about it outside, but this in theory is correct. However, in practice not so much. The guy I work for has numerous appellate briefs in fighting the evidence practices here.  Basically they don't let you challenge the sample or the machine, only the operator.  The operator shows up, says "Yep, I pushed the button like they told me too and it spit out a answer that was correct." Try to verify the information, and they tell you data is "too burdensome" to recover for discovery.

The 911 tapes have apparently been released, but I haven't been able to find the actual audio anywhere.  Hawaii News Now ran this story with a transcript of one of the calls.

One of the anonymous callers said Deedy used the knife to cut away Eldert's shirt to assist.  Interesting twist here..............

Interesting case. :-/ Not good for anyone, really. Those angry at the Fed now have another reason to be angry, those who resent being painted by that anger now have another reason to resent it. Gun rights advocates will want to cast it as self defense and a reason to can the "may issue" fallacy here while gun control advocates will cite it as yet more reason to keep guns off the streets.

I don't see this going well though I'm certainly not a lawyer.

First, is there any federal law or permit that allowed Deedy to ~legally~ carry a firearm while off duty in Hawaii?

Also, if Deedy was trying to break something up.... doesn't that make him the instigator of the altercation that led to his use of lethal self defense? In other words didn't he put himself in harms way? Given Hawaii's lovely "no one has guns in public" policy and Deedy wasn't at home or work, how could this be an easy case of self defense?

It isn't as bad as the Massie trail and I doubt he's going to get off with a pleasant hour of tea with the Governor. Still, its going to be hard to keep this case from being politically and racially charged.

His badge and credentials is all he needs to carry.  Via the LEOSA act,  all sworn law enforcement in the US are allowed to carry off duty anywhere in the US except for certain places, like "gun free zones", military bases, etc. 

Thanks, hillbilly19. I was pretty sure I was missing something and that was it.

How can we listen to the tapes?

Re: guys carrying off duty. A federal policeman told me that they were not supposed to carry off duty. Have to pick up their gun at beginning of shift, return it at end of shift. Have no idea why

How can we listen to the tapes?

Re: guys carrying off duty. A federal policeman told me that they were not supposed to carry off duty. Have to pick up their gun at beginning of shift, return it at end of shift. Have no idea why

Click the link and it will start playing

The 911 tapes have apparently been released, but I haven't been able to find the actual audio anywhere.  Hawaii News Now ran this story with a transcript of one of the calls.

How can we listen to the tapes?

Re: guys carrying off duty. A federal policeman told me that they were not supposed to carry off duty. Have to pick up their gun at beginning of shift, return it at end of shift. Have no idea why

What branch is he in? I don't know any federal guys that check out from the armory (that are actually law enforcement officers).

Quote from: GZire on November 23, 2011, 02:29:08 PM

Quote from: fstbckgt on November 23, 2011, 06:09:26 AM

We need a dedicated thread for informative videos like these^

"I told them not to talk!!!!"

Ha ha ha ha...........awesome.........

I lol'd at that, too. 

  lol, im used to my sarcasm going completely undetected when posting on forums

Quote from: pj_benn on November 24, 2011, 11:11:42 AM

How can we listen to the tapes?

Re: guys carrying off duty. A federal policeman told me that they were not supposed to carry off duty. Have to pick up their gun at beginning of shift, return it at end of shift. Have no idea why

What branch is he in? I don't know any federal guys that check out from the armory (that are actually law enforcement officers).

branch? He is a federal policeman on joint base pearl/hickam.