AOPA Article about Police/DHS/FBI overreach

Bob Ridpath said:
....People don't like anything aviation-related, squirrels (raccoons/possums) on their porch, cats in a tree, cars driving too fast-slow-the speed limit, trees that "might fall" someday, ice fisherman, boat fisherman, shore fisherman, people who might knock on their door, call the wrong number or how long they have to wait at the McDonald's drive thru..... busy bodies with cell phones... errr ... well-meaning citizens who feel a deep concern for a stranger's well-being.
Click to expand...

lol.
 
Qutch said:
I do something similar to that. There is an activity I engage in on the coastlines that routinely results in 911 being called. I'm not doing anything illegal or that endangers anyone else, but it gets people excited. If I don't head it off in advance, when I look towards the shoreline it is not unusual for me to see patrol cars and fire engines with flashing lights waiting for me when I come ashore, or LEOs headed out to sea in my direction. Once the ball starts rolling it is hard to stop it. A procedure I use eliminates the risk and gives me a documented defense if I should be questioned later. Pilots should not have to do this, but it can be useful when flying near nuclear plants, chemical plants, oil refineries, open air assemblies, or any other sensitive targets. LEOs suggested that we use do this and it has worked for us so far:

Do not call 911. But before arriving, do call the Non-Emergency Number for 911. Give them your info directly and ask them not to dispatch. I call or visit the Coast Guard station separately. It works for me. Bob Ridpath is a 911 dispatcher. He might be able to provide some insight into this proactive prevention procedure.
.
Click to expand...
Now I'm really curious about what offshore activity your engaging in.
 
UAL747400 said:
Action is hardly ever taken against LEOs. They are above the law. By action, I mean criminal action..
Click to expand...

That's actually not true at all. Do some homework. LEOs have often gotten criminally charged for a variety of things, both legit as well as not.-
 
UAL747400 said:
To the same level as an ordinary citizen, I disagree.
Click to expand...

Based on what? Numbers of citizens vs number of LEOs? If that's the case, then of course not; as there are far more citizens than LEOs. But remember, not each and every criminal charge that an LEO gets charged with is advertised on the national news. It happens far more than you think.
 
UAL747400 said:
To the same level as an ordinary citizen, I disagree.
Click to expand...

I think that technically you are correct in many situations. They are immune from civil and criminal liability for many "mistakes", where an ordinary citizen would not get the same benefit-of-the-doubt or legal assistance in a lot of situations. But someone here needs to explain "legal immunity" and the reason for it.

I could take a shot at it, but MikeD might do a better job. Mike?
.
 
MikeD said:
Based on what? Numbers of citizens vs number of LEOs? If that's the case, then of course not; as there are far more citizens than LEOs. But remember, not each and every criminal charge that an LEO gets charged with is advertised on the national news. It happens far more than you think.
Click to expand...

Lets just say that the way the local PD operates back home has put a sour taste in my mouth. The older guys, they're fine, guys my age or slightly older is where I see problems. I personally have never had any problems, but I still have skepticism towards the entire department's professionalism and how they handle misconduct.
 
I would imagine the PD and the LEO would be in serious if they shot at an aircraft.

1. only NORAD has the option to shoot aircraft after receiving authorization form only a handful of individuals.
2. The LEO has no idea where that round is going to land if he misses the target (could kill and innocent civilian)
3. Let's say he hits the plane and takes it down and it kills people on the ground (imagine the crap storm then) and liability against the officer and PD.

AOPA needs to take this head on and get all the major players involved on their side. I don't think NORAD whats local PD encroaching on their missions
 
Bandit_Driver said:
I would imagine the PD and the LEO would be in serious if they shot at an aircraft.
Click to expand...

In this situation and the ones you cite (in flight), likely so. Items 2 and 3 that you cite, those could well apply to shooting at an automobile/big rig/bus, etc too, so they're not just specific to an airplane. But just to add onto, in other situations (namely on ground) an airplane is the same as any other vehicle and can be shot at in certain circumstances.
 
Qutch said:
The arrest report, however, paints a different picture, alleging that Fleming “had to be ordered several times to land” before he complied. Griffin strongly contests this version of events: “I was the only one on the unicom with him,” she said. “I never demanded him to land.”
Click to expand...

Gliders are a bit unique in that it may not be possible to land immediately. At 1500 feet in a thermal, making an airport even a few miles away would likely not be safe. Staying in the thermal to gain sufficient altitude to safely make the field is a more appropiate course of action. Depending on what the winds were, a field further away may have been the more practical one to land at. (With 25+kts winds aloft, the downwind field will always be my choice - even if more than twice as far away. Making 80kts over the ground gives you more options than making 30...)

A typical cross country glider pilot would already have a few non-aiport fields in mind if they were down that low and the thermals didn't work out.
 
Generally, most state and Fed law only allows LE to use deadly force in defense of themselves or others. As one who has both been in these situations and them later represented LE as well, I think that this situation was over blown and escalated by LE. This could have been handled in a much less intrusive manner.
I realize that there will be arguments supporting both sides and I only offer the below to clarify.

An example of a use-of-force continuum follows:
  • Officer Presence — No force is used. Considered the best way to resolve a situation.
    • The mere presence of a law enforcement officer works to deter crime or diffuse a situation.
    • Officers' attitudes are professional and nonthreatening.
  • Verbalization — Force is not-physical.
    • Officers issue calm, nonthreatening commands, such as "Let me see your identification and registration."
    • Officers may increase their volume and shorten commands in an attempt to gain compliance. Short commands might include "Stop," or "Don't move."
  • Empty-Hand Control — Officers use bodily force to gain control of a situation.
    • Soft technique. Officers use grabs, holds and joint locks to restrain an individual.
    • Hard technique. Officers use punches and kicks to restrain an individual.
  • Less-Lethal Methods — Officers use less-lethal technologies to gain control of a situation.
  • Blunt impact.Officers may use a baton or projectile to immobilize a combative person.
    • Chemical. Officers may use chemical sprays or projectiles embedded with chemicals to restrain an individual (e.g., pepper spray).
    • Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs). Officers may use CEDs to immobilize an individual. CEDs discharge a high-voltage, low-amperage jolt of electricity at a distance.
  • Lethal Force — Officers use lethal weapons to gain control of a situation. Should only be used if a suspect poses a serious threat to the officer or another individual.
    • Officers use deadly weapons such as firearms to stop an individual's actions.
 
Bandit_Driver said:
AOPA needs to take this head on and get all the major players involved on their side. I don't think NORAD whats local PD encroaching on their missions
Click to expand...

I've had police cruisers show up at the airport a bunch of times when I've overflown noise sensitive areas landing (necessary for weather). Guns drawn only once :)
 
Speaking of getting shot at... We had a pilot flying out of CRG shot on new years eve while flying over downtown jax. He is one of our banner towers but I don't know if he was lugging a banner around that night (I can't imagine banner towing at night is very profitable). Anyways, he heard a bang in the back of the aircraft and then he felt something hit him in the back of the head. Turns out a .45 slug went through the back window and grazed him in the back of the head. He had to get staples and it left quite a mess. Wonder if LEO was hanging around downtown jax? :aghast:
 
chrisreedrules said:
Speaking of getting shot at... We had a pilot flying out of CRG shot on new years eve while flying over downtown jax. He is one of our banner towers but I don't know if he was lugging a banner around that night (I can't imagine banner towing at night is very profitable). Anyways, he heard a bang in the back of the aircraft and then he felt something hit him in the back of the head. Turns out a .45 slug went through the back window and grazed him in the back of the head. He had to get staples and it left quite a mess. Wonder if LEO was hanging around downtown jax? :aghast:
Click to expand...

Read all about that one online. http://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/160po7/i_got_grazed_by_a_bullet_on_nye/
 
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1358210797.656258.jpg


Oh noez!
 
I was refueling at a very remote municipal airport on a Sunday and a LEO showed up to see why someone was at the airport (?). Anyway, I was distracted talking to him and ran about 10 gallons of 100LL onto the ramp before getting the pump shut off. I glanced over at him and he said, "I didn't see anything - too damn much paperwork to fill out. Have a safe flight home."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top