OT: Orlando police

[oldhorn2]

so if no one went in, how did they know a device was strapped to the shooter?...we have no information about what went on.....who knows?

I submit that the new police imperitive is to neutralize the shooter. They can do that at a great distance if they have line of sight. I do not buy that reasoning at all.They simply cannot allow a shooter to have free unlimited time to unarmed citizens.

 

[ASURAM2010]

If you ever have a chance to watch the Paris attack this will show you the realization of being around gun fire in a typical everyday setting. The people in the restaurant did what I think many of us would do. Head toward an exit or a hiding place! Now in good Ole America you may get lucky and have someone carrying a concealed gun in a restaurant but more than likely not in a club.

If anyone is concealed carrying in club, they are breaking a law (most likely). Most clubs, bars, etc. have the 51% sign at the front door that states at least 51% of their income is made off of alcohol sales. Anywhere this sign in present, concealed carry holders are no longer allowed by law to carry in those places. Lots of other places too, but that one is the most relevant

 

[LongfellowDrew]

so if no one went in, how did they know a device was strapped to the shooter?...we have no information about what went on.....who knows?

I submit that the new police imperitive is to neutralize the shooter. They can do that at a great distance if they have line of sight. I do not buy that reasoning at all.They simply cannot allow a shooter to have free unlimited time to unarmed citizens.

I think I read or heard on the news but I'll have to confirm that some of the people were snap chatting or texting about the shooter. I could be wrong though.

 

[LongfellowDrew]

so if no one went in, how did they know a device was strapped to the shooter?...we have no information about what went on.....who knows?

I submit that the new police imperitive is to neutralize the shooter. They can do that at a great distance if they have line of sight. I do not buy that reasoning at all.They simply cannot allow a shooter to have free unlimited time to unarmed citizens.

Once in the restroom, Mateen called 911 and made statements pledging allegiance to the Islamic State, Orlando Police Chief John Mina said Monday.

That's when the shooting stopped and hostage negotiators began talking with him, the chief said.

'We had a team of crisis negotiators that talked to the suspect, trying to get as much information as possible, what we could do to help resolve the situation... He wasn't asking a whole lot, and we were doing most of the asking,' Mina said.

But Mateen soon began talking about explosives and bombs, leading Mina to decide about 5am to detonate an explosive on an exterior wall to prevent potentially greater loss of life.

 

[TX1972]

so if no one went in, how did they know a device was strapped to the shooter?...we have no information about what went on.....who knows?

I submit that the new police imperitive is to neutralize the shooter. They can do that at a great distance if they have line of sight. I do not buy that reasoning at all.They simply cannot allow a shooter to have free unlimited time to unarmed citizens.

I think they did exactly that.

 

[NDAFArly]

Good call NDA. I threw McDill out there because it was nearby, and even though command structure is there, I assume from time to time there has to be assets visiting for "unknown" reasons. I threw out Eglin because I know elements of the 7th sfg is based there. I know ODA's are not tier 1, but I'd give them the nod over local police Swat.

And yes, I've seen the reports as well (now) that they suspected he had something attached to him that could have been a bomb. No doubt, a game changer.

However, this brings me back to the fact that it's all pretty much moot because, as bad a$$ as those guys are, they still can't act on US soil without a sh!t ton of laws being broken and/or legally averted. Personally, I'd be totally cool with those guys being allowed a hall pass on US soil in hostage situations or active shooter situations only.

But thank you for your input man! It's completely cool to add people to this board that posses knowledge that we can all benefit from.

No problem. I know the special team, which I will not name, at Fort Carson offered to end the shootout in Colorado but was turned down by local law enforcement. So it can be very frustrating.

 

[HornsRuleU]

Just because something was an early report doesn't make it true. Someone wants to sound like they know something, and so they say something to get on the air, or whatever. Or they're just confused and have a hard time differentiating between what they (think they) perceived and what actually happened.

Or witnesses hear another witness (or rumor-starter) say something that corroborates their confusion, and so the confusion becomes crowdsourced.

Later, the conspiracy nuts take advantage of this (and get taken advantage of). "So-and-so heard 3 shots from the grassy knoll, blah, blah." Well, maybe the sound waves DID sound like they came from there, but it doesn't mean there was a shooter there.

 

[elcapitan009]

Actually it was probably a better idea than sitting for 3 hours with....When C Whitman started shooting people from the Tower, the radio stations called for civilians to act. Within 20 minutes the gunfire from below stopped further mayhem.

Two completely different scenarios. Isolated above on a tower vs. in a crowd.

 

[elcapitan009]

The ones I've seen are pretty lame. They give a big speech about not trying to be a hero, get out of the building, barricade the door, stay low, quiet etc. They need to ramp that sh!t up and actually get people adrenal gland pumping. Problem is some old dude would probably have a heart attack and die during the training and then you'd be labeled as "no better than the terrorists".

Right. Because fire drills (which you are much more likely to die in) are carried out so exuberantly.

 

[elcapitan009]

I agree with your point. Just thought I'd highlight that in these situations there are usually multiple guns on the guy and multiple preloaded clips. Don't think they are sitting there blowing bubble gum and slipping rounds in to a clip while everyone else is busy texting, tweeting, facetiming, snapchatting, and staring in terror at a guy with an unloaded gun just leisurely load a clip.

On top of that, you'd imagine that it is utter chaos in the first round of fire. People are pushing and trying to get away. Nobody is running towards a gun because you don't know if it is someone there to kill a particular person or if it's a massacre. You don't know. You just run.

By the time that is over, those people who have fled have gotten out. Those who have been shot are of no help. Those that are hiding... well, they don't really know how many rounds he has left in the chamber. They don't know if he's reloading or just waiting for them to stick their head out, so they continue to hide and hope they get passed over.

Now lucky for us, this board must be full of the toughest, most sure-shot, steely-nerved bunch of cowboys I've ever had the good graces to come across. I have no question that you posters would save us all in almost any event, should you ever leave the comfort of that well-worn seat cushion.

 

[oldhorn2]

the only thing I disagree with in the above is that I suspect that for the first several seconds, no one knows what is happening....then they disbelieve what is happening....and then....probably just what you described.

But I bet people ran in every direction, even towards the gunman, because you dont know where the shots are coming from

 

[Texxxxas]

On top of that, you'd imagine that it is utter chaos in the first round of fire. People are pushing and trying to get away. Nobody is running towards a gun because you don't know if it is someone there to kill a particular person or if it's a massacre. You don't know. You just run.

By the time that is over, those people who have fled have gotten out. Those who have been shot are of no help. Those that are hiding... well, they don't really know how many rounds he has left in the chamber. They don't know if he's reloading or just waiting for them to stick their head out, so they continue to hide and hope they get passed over.

Now lucky for us, this board must be full of the toughest, most sure-shot, steely-nerved bunch of cowboys I've ever had the good graces to come across. I have no question that you posters would save us all in almost any event, should you ever leave the comfort of that well-worn seat cushion.

Lol, I'm glad you said it. Some of these guys try to hard.

 

[elcapitan009]

the only thing I disagree with in the above is that I suspect that for the first several seconds, no one knows what is happening....then they disbelieve what is happening....and then....probably just what you described.

But I bet people ran in every direction, even towards the gunman, because you dont know where the shots are coming from

agreed. i'm sure it's chaos in every direction.

 

[TX1972]

the only thing I disagree with in the above is that I suspect that for the first several seconds, no one knows what is happening....then they disbelieve what is happening....and then....probably just what you described.

But I bet people ran in every direction, even towards the gunman, because you dont know where the shots are coming from

The problem is not the behavior of the people in the club, many of whom eventually became victims. It's the behavior of the Orlando SWAT team. They got a lot of 'splaining to do.

 

[LongfellowDrew]

On top of that, you'd imagine that it is utter chaos in the first round of fire. People are pushing and trying to get away. Nobody is running towards a gun because you don't know if it is someone there to kill a particular person or if it's a massacre. You don't know. You just run.

By the time that is over, those people who have fled have gotten out. Those who have been shot are of no help. Those that are hiding... well, they don't really know how many rounds he has left in the chamber. They don't know if he's reloading or just waiting for them to stick their head out, so they continue to hide and hope they get passed over.

Now lucky for us, this board must be full of the toughest, most sure-shot, steely-nerved bunch of cowboys I've ever had the good graces to come across. I have no question that you posters would save us all in almost any event, should you ever leave the comfort of that well-worn seat cushion.

THANK YOU!

 

[NDAFArly]

The problem is not the behavior of the people in the club, many of whom eventually became victims. It's the behavior of the Orlando SWAT team. They got a lot of 'splaining to do.

I would guess they were held back due to the report of a device attached to the shooter. They usually aren't allowed to go in against their own wishes for fear of an explosion that would kill everyone.
That is another difference between local law enforcement & CQB rescue (Tier 1) in the military. Rescue teams in the military are mandated to go in regardless of the danger to themselves or their team. If a team loses an operator, or multiple operators, they will still push ahead & neutralize the enemy until all hostages are safe. In a situation like this the team might lose a guy or two going in, but would guarantee it would all be over in less than a minute after they entered thus saving dozens of hostages.
Even Tier 2 units (Seal Teams, ODA's, STS) would be more qualified to go in than SWAT.

Tier 1 (Devgru, Delta, 24STS) will lose multiple guys to save one innocent person. Local law enforcement will not, & is not expected to. Huge difference in mentality & capabilities.

 

[oldhorn2]

It could be, but I would be very surprised to learn that SWAT held back due to reports of a "device" From what I know the info on the device came from the shooter himself when he 911 called the police from the bathroom.

And ND you are wrong when you say local law enforcement will not go in due to danger. That is not how they are training....at least not in Texas for sure.For that matter there was a hostage situation today in Amarillo where the SWAT went in and killed the bad guy...at a Walmart of all places.

 

[NDAFArly]

It could be, but I would be very surprised to learn that SWAT held back due to reports of a "device" From what I know the info on the device came from the shooter himself when he 911 called the police from the bathroom.

And ND you are wrong when you say local law enforcement will not go in due to danger. That is not how they are training....at least not in Texas for sure.For that matter there was a hostage situation today in Amarillo where the SWAT went in and killed the bad guy...at a Walmart of all places.

I didn't say they wouldn't go in, I said that they don't have to go in. Police, including SWAT, are allowed to access the safety of the situation & decide how to act based on their accessment. If they decide it is too risky or too dangerous they do not have to go in. They cannot be held responsible for that decision.
Military units do not have that same mandate. They go in no matter the risk & will continue until every member of the team is dead. They can be held accountable for not doing so.
As for Texas, each city has SWAT rules & regulations, not states as a whole.
There are non-military SWAT team members who are recruited into a federal SWAT program that has the same mandates as the military, & are trained by the federal agency not named.

A perfect example of the difference is what happened it Colorado last year, Orlando & the rescue in Afghanistan.
In Colorado the SWAT was held back once they received fire injuring officers. In Orlando they weren't sure the number of shooters/situation & waited. In Afghanistan the Devgru team went in without knowing numbers, lost first guy through the door to gunfire, but kept pushing through non-stop until hostage was secured & enemy all killed.

So I'm not saying SWAT won't go in. But they are not forced to, & often will back out if they take losses. Their mandate is safety first. The military's mandate is mission first regardless of losses.

 

[clob94]

Right. Because fire drills (which you are much more likely to die in) are carried out so exuberantly.

I agree. Those suck too. But we've been doing fire drills since we were kids so going through those motions have become routine. While this is a "new" concept in America, active shooter drills I mean, I would think the companies doing that training would be a little more, I don't know, intense. To heighten people's senses a bit. I'm not saying I've got the perfect idea for that sort of training, I don't. But surely they can do better. Maybe hire some extra military guys to do it or something.

 

[TX1972]

I didn't say they wouldn't go in, I said that they don't have to go in. Police, including SWAT, are allowed to access the safety of the situation & decide how to act based on their accessment. If they decide it is too risky or too dangerous they do not have to go in. They cannot be held responsible for that decision.
Military units do not have that same mandate. They go in no matter the risk & will continue until every member of the team is dead. They can be held accountable for not doing so.
As for Texas, each city has SWAT rules & regulations, not states as a whole.
There are non-military SWAT team members who are recruited into a federal SWAT program that has the same mandates as the military, & are trained by the federal agency not named.

A perfect example of the difference is what happened it Colorado last year, Orlando & the rescue in Afghanistan.
In Colorado the SWAT was held back once they received fire injuring officers. In Orlando they weren't sure the number of shooters/situation & waited. In Afghanistan the Devgru team went in without knowing numbers, lost first guy through the door to gunfire, but kept pushing through non-stop until hostage was secured & enemy all killed.

So I'm not saying SWAT won't go in. But they are not forced to, & often will back out if they take losses. Their mandate is safety first. The military's mandate is mission first regardless of losses.

So SWAT is for serving warrants and if you want protection call the military?

 

[NDAFArly]

So SWAT is for serving warrants and if you want protection call the military?

Lol, no. SWAT is very important. But they are forced to follow certain rules as policemen. I wish they didn't have to, but they do.
For example, in Colorado one of the officers shot was done so while identifying himself (per the law) & telling a person (who turned out to be the shooter) to get on the floor.

That is the legal crap SWAT has to deal with.

As for the mentality side. SWAT members who leave the team (or removed) have been documented to say they have made choices with their families & own life on their mind. This is perfectly legal. If a member of SWAT decides he wants to be safe & go home to his family he can. A member of the military CSAR cannot make that decision. In fact, they are referred to as triple volunteers. They volunteered for the military (thus giving up many rights), they volunteered for special operations (thus acknowledging special types of missions), then they volunteered for "selection" (to be part of JSOC) which then means they swore an oath to put all other lives above their own. If a member of these teams backs down they are either non-judicially or even judicially punished.
So I have heard.

 

[ASURAM2010]

I would guess they were held back due to the report of a device attached to the shooter. They usually aren't allowed to go in against their own wishes for fear of an explosion that would kill everyone.
That is another difference between local law enforcement & CQB rescue (Tier 1) in the military. Rescue teams in the military are mandated to go in regardless of the danger to themselves or their team. If a team loses an operator, or multiple operators, they will still push ahead & neutralize the enemy until all hostages are safe. In a situation like this the team might lose a guy or two going in, but would guarantee it would all be over in less than a minute after they entered thus saving dozens of hostages.
Even Tier 2 units (Seal Teams, ODA's, STS) would be more qualified to go in than SWAT.

Tier 1 (Devgru, Delta, 24STS) will lose multiple guys to save one innocent person. Local law enforcement will not, & is not expected to. Huge difference in mentality & capabilities.

I am in no way a military guy, and I appreciate the sacrifices that these men and women make, but what does it take to be a Tier 1 person, if a Seal team is considered Tier 2. I always thought those guys were the end all be all when it comes to special forces. So incredibly thankful for people that are willing to give their life for people that they have never met and to protect ideals that they believe in.

 

[clob94]

Your tier 1 guys use names that active duty guys aren't supposed to "talk about". Your army tier 1 guys used to be called CAG which stood for Combat Applications Group. They've recently changed their name to ACE which stands for Army Compartmented Elements. Their technical name is 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment- but you know them as Delta or Delta Force. Officially they don't "exist".

On the naval side, your tier 1 guys are known as the United States naval special warfare development group or DEVGRU. You know them as SEAL Team 6.

You have to pretty much be a Billy bad a$$ of the valley to get invited to be in these units. Devgru nominates out of other SEAL teams (1,2,3,4,5,7 etc) and you're selected for additional training. Delta pulls mostly out of ODA's or "Green Berets".

The third one that I know of is called SAD-SOG. Special activities division-special operations group. This unit is usually "black" meaning the CIA runs it and they do things that the US military can't or doesn't want anybody to know they are affiliated with. SAD recruits out of DEVGRU and Delta mostly. These guys aren't just triggermen, they have trade craft. They are basically bad a$$ spies that can kill you with a plastic spoon or topple your regime. They don't wear uniforms, show their rank, grow their hair and beards (if needed) have language skills, can run computers- just Uber smart dudes that have the highest military training available. You don't want to mess with those cats.
I know a little about the 24th STS, airforce guys. Basically as well trained as SEALs, but they spend years learning how to communicate with aircraft as well. They are in fact air traffic controllers. When the Haiti emergency happened a few years ago, they dropped a few of those guys into Haiti to help with the landing of emergency aid aircraft because the airport had been decimated, and those dudes got set up at the airfield under a tent with a freaking card table and walkie talkies-- and started directing in aircraft to land at a remarkable rate. They are also the dudes that if the sh!t hits the fan in a fire fight, they call in the gun ships and direct that bad a$$ AC130 onto which bad guys need to go bye bye. They can do the same with drones, fighter jets, bombers- if it flies and has ordinance, those dudes can have it dropped on your head. I think, correct me if I'm wrong, they can do the same thing as a JTAC and call in artillery strikes and the like.
All of these guys go to different schools to learn their skill sets. BUDs, jump school to do HAHO and HALO jumps, sniper school, driving school, they can do mountain training, train with other SOF Allied forces like the British SAS, snow ski training with the Swedish dudes (not sure if it's them or Norway) -- there's literally a ton of training these guys can do.

Add all that up and that's what makes those dudes tier 1.

 

[clob94]

How'd I do?

 

[ASURAM2010]

How'd I do?

Have no clue, but I know I don't want to mess with any of those dudes. Glad there are people who will do that type of job so that I can do mine.

 

[Texxxxas]

Have no clue, but I know I don't want to mess with any of those dudes. Glad there are people who will do that type of job so that I can do mine.

Indeed. During basic training in the Air Force, they ask who wants to go that route. The training for a combat controller is about two years long, and the wash out rate is around 95%. I wanted no part of that, and I thought I was a beast. I did a lot of training with the Army Rangers, and that was more than enough for me. The most chill, quiet, slim dude in my flight, became a combat controller. He was a beast. These loud talking tough guys who wish they could get action, only think they are about that life. I've spent time in Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi...you kiss the ground when you get back to the US; if you come back.

 

[oldhorn2]

yall beginning to understand why I called the FBI/ATF a clown act?

 

[clob94]

Oh dude, I am. Here's what gets me, we've got people yelling "if you're on the no fly list, you shouldn"t be able to....... blah blah blah".
First off, as I've stated before, while that idea might SEEM like a good one, as soon as the FBI or feds can explain to me how Ted Kennedy got on that list, and how it took him 6 months to get off it, THEN explain to me how my little brother got on it--- and incidentally, it effected his life, his job, his employer was like "how in the hell did you get put on the no fly list?"..... it almost cost him his job.... we can't even deliver mail with much proficiency-- the only thing our government does well is our military. And I'm not ready to credit elected officials for that.

And let's look at that no fly list for a second. Who's in charge of vetting that Iist? Is it the FBI? Is it the same people that vetted the list of security guards that were working at federal buildings? Are those the same people that will be vetting the "middle eastern refugees" they want to bring in to the US? How do you contest being on the list or get off the list? What's the criteria for being PUT on that list? To this day they NEVER explained to my brother WHY he was on that list. A blonde haired blue eyed kid who doesn't share my love for international travel, a kid who was born in west texas, the grandson of a veteran of WWII, and someone who'd been to Mexico and I think Canada in his life time. How'd he get put on that list?

Fvck them and fvck their list. Think about this for a second-- many of you have jobs that require travel. Imagine walking into your boss and saying "Boss, I went to the airport today to fly to Phoenix and meet with our client and they wouldn't allow me to board the plane. Then I was detained by the FAA and DHS and questioned for 5 hours. By the way, we lost that big client in Phoenix."

Soooooo do you think the feds give a sh!t that your company now is going to go belly up because your biggest client was stood up by you? Then what happens when you tell the client "well, Bob couldn't get on the plane because he is now on the no fly list....". Pretty sure your client never calls again. Is the Fed going to fix that problem? Are they going to call your client and explain that it was a mistake? Are they going to repair your damaged reputation? By the time they get around to it (if they ever do) will it even matter? What if your boss fires you for a mistake made by the feds? Do you sue your boss for wrongful termination? Do you sue the feds for improperly putting you on the list? You're not going to win that trial..... and the next job interview you go on, imagine explaining that to the person you're interviewing with..... "well uh, for some weird reason, I'm on the no fly list....but I'm trying to work with the government to get off it....". Think you'll get hired?

 

[oldhorn2]

I could tell you stories about my personal dealings with the FBI that would literally leave you shaking your head....and I am not talking about being picked on by them, I am talking about wourking in partnership with them and watching them fumble and bumble until I had to get the Rangers involved....and seeing the Rangers clear the case in 3 hours that the FBI/naval intellegence had screwed up for 3 months.

 

[LongfellowDrew]

Oh dude, I am. Here's what gets me, we've got people yelling "if you're on the no fly list, you shouldn"t be able to....... blah blah blah".
First off, as I've stated before, while that idea might SEEM like a good one, as soon as the FBI or feds can explain to me how Ted Kennedy got on that list, and how it took him 6 months to get off it, THEN explain to me how my little brother got on it--- and incidentally, it effected his life, his job, his employer was like "how in the hell did you get put on the no fly list?"..... it almost cost him his job.... we can't even deliver mail with much proficiency-- the only thing our government does well is our military. And I'm not ready to credit elected officials for that.

And let's look at that no fly list for a second. Who's in charge of vetting that Iist? Is it the FBI? Is it the same people that vetted the list of security guards that were working at federal buildings? Are those the same people that will be vetting the "middle eastern refugees" they want to bring in to the US? How do you contest being on the list or get off the list? What's the criteria for being PUT on that list? To this day they NEVER explained to my brother WHY he was on that list. A blonde haired blue eyed kid who doesn't share my love for international travel, a kid who was born in west texas, the grandson of a veteran of WWII, and someone who'd been to Mexico and I think Canada in his life time. How'd he get put on that list?

Fvck them and fvck their list. Think about this for a second-- many of you have jobs that require travel. Imagine walking into your boss and saying "Boss, I went to the airport today to fly to Phoenix and meet with our client and they wouldn't allow me to board the plane. Then I was detained by the FAA and DHS and questioned for 5 hours. By the way, we lost that big client in Phoenix."

Soooooo do you think the feds give a sh!t that your company now is going to go belly up because your biggest client was stood up by you? Then what happens when you tell the client "well, Bob couldn't get on the plane because he is now on the no fly list....". Pretty sure your client never calls again. Is the Fed going to fix that problem? Are they going to call your client and explain that it was a mistake? Are they going to repair your damaged reputation? By the time they get around to it (if they ever do) will it even matter? What if your boss fires you for a mistake made by the feds? Do you sue your boss for wrongful termination? Do you sue the feds for improperly putting you on the list? You're not going to win that trial..... and the next job interview you go on, imagine explaining that to the person you're interviewing with..... "well uh, for some weird reason, I'm on the no fly list....but I'm trying to work with the government to get off it....". Think you'll get hired?

Do you find out you're on the no fly list once you are at the airport or do they send you a letter? I travel often so obviously I've never been on this list.

 

[clob94]

That's another good question Drew. My brother found out while we were all loading up to go fishing in Minnesota. Ya, me, him, and my father..... all standing there looking stupid at the San Antonio airport, ready to go walleye fishing, and baby bro gets told, "I'm sorry, you're on the no fly list....". Dad went ape sh!t. I won't repeat what was said but...... the American Airlines dude and the DHS guys knew which way the wind blew after that.

 

[obviouslyZRH]

Oh dude, I am. Here's what gets me, we've got people yelling "if you're on the no fly list, you shouldn"t be able to....... blah blah blah".
First off, as I've stated before, while that idea might SEEM like a good one, as soon as the FBI or feds can explain to me how Ted Kennedy got on that list, and how it took him 6 months to get off it, THEN explain to me how my little brother got on it--- and incidentally, it effected his life, his job, his employer was like "how in the hell did you get put on the no fly list?"..... it almost cost him his job.... we can't even deliver mail with much proficiency-- the only thing our government does well is our military. And I'm not ready to credit elected officials for that.

And let's look at that no fly list for a second. Who's in charge of vetting that Iist? Is it the FBI? Is it the same people that vetted the list of security guards that were working at federal buildings? Are those the same people that will be vetting the "middle eastern refugees" they want to bring in to the US? How do you contest being on the list or get off the list? What's the criteria for being PUT on that list? To this day they NEVER explained to my brother WHY he was on that list. A blonde haired blue eyed kid who doesn't share my love for international travel, a kid who was born in west texas, the grandson of a veteran of WWII, and someone who'd been to Mexico and I think Canada in his life time. How'd he get put on that list?

Fvck them and fvck their list. Think about this for a second-- many of you have jobs that require travel. Imagine walking into your boss and saying "Boss, I went to the airport today to fly to Phoenix and meet with our client and they wouldn't allow me to board the plane. Then I was detained by the FAA and DHS and questioned for 5 hours. By the way, we lost that big client in Phoenix."

Soooooo do you think the feds give a sh!t that your company now is going to go belly up because your biggest client was stood up by you? Then what happens when you tell the client "well, Bob couldn't get on the plane because he is now on the no fly list....". Pretty sure your client never calls again. Is the Fed going to fix that problem? Are they going to call your client and explain that it was a mistake? Are they going to repair your damaged reputation? By the time they get around to it (if they ever do) will it even matter? What if your boss fires you for a mistake made by the feds? Do you sue your boss for wrongful termination? Do you sue the feds for improperly putting you on the list? You're not going to win that trial..... and the next job interview you go on, imagine explaining that to the person you're interviewing with..... "well uh, for some weird reason, I'm on the no fly list....but I'm trying to work with the government to get off it....". Think you'll get hired?

Yeah I've heard that list is a bit of a black hole that sucks in a lot of random folks. Wasn't there a story some years ago about a baby being on the no-fly list because he had the same name as one of the 9/11 hijackers? Real thorough algorithm they got over there.

But if the list could be cleaned up (here's where we step into hypothetical fantasy land) or somehow replaced with a more fact-based list, would you be opposed to preventing firearm sales to them? Someone above mentioned how a background check should have caught this Orlando shooter before he had the gun, but that some mistake gave him a clean background. I hear people using these often as reasons that increasing gun control is a pointless endeavor, but I think the first step would be to fix the systems that gun control would rely on. I would hope that both sides of the aisle are up for improving them, but I've been let down before.

Maybe they need to make a watch list and a "no seriously this guy's dangerous" list.

 

[oldhorn2]

Less of a problem with the warnings and more of a problem with the Moe ,Larry and Curley syndrome of the FBI

 

[ekal48]

How'd I do?

Good, that's very interesting.

How many tier 1 guys are we talking about?

 

[clob94]

Oldhorn, dude you nailed it. Not only are these guys clowns, this is a full on clown show. There's a clown car, dudes wearing clown shoes, perfectly done clown make-up, big red noses- cotton candy and seals balancing balls on their nose. Clown show!

I say we do the no fly, no buy list. You're thinking, "WHAAAA??? Clob are you serious man!".

Yes I am---- PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING--- if someone is falsely or mistakenly put on this list, once they prove otherwise- the FBI or DHS or whatever agency is in charge of said list must PAY, out of their budget, 1 million dollars, TAX FREE, to the person they wrongly accused and flagged.

You see, I live in a world where if you fvck up, there are consequences. There's accountability. There's repercussions. If you as a taxpayer fvck up on YOUR tax return, what happens? You get fined, and then hit with penalty and interest. If THEY fvck up, shouldn't there be something similar? Shouldn't THEY be held accountable? Shouldn't THEY be penalized?

Or perhaps Congress should have to pay out of their retirement. Perhaps that would create more thorough oversight of this list---- Dear Congress person, if you put someone on the list that is obviously not supposed to be on the list, we collectively dock your retirements by 1 million bucks and award that to the falsely accused. Signed, the people who pay your salary.

Of course we all know that we pleebs, we boot lickers, we throng of luddites will never get such fair treatment. We must know our role and shut up and take the lashings of our masters.....