(the two of us) , Whenifhow, and LasVegasDave.
Posted on 04/11/2014 4:17:30 AM PDT by Timber Rattler
A Columbus, Ohio, family said their children were traumatized after what was meant to be a fun trip to the National Museum of the United States Air Force ended with guns drawn on them.
Alice Hill, 65, her daughter-in-law, Wendy, and two young grandchildren visited the museum on April 4 and, as they were leaving, were ordered to get out of their vehicle by military police. Hill said the officers pulled guns on the family and cuffed the adults in front of the children, according to an incident report.
(snip)
The family was detained for about 90 minutes as authorities sorted through questions about whether the van was stolen — it wasn't — and whether they were casing cars in the lot — they weren't.
(snip)
"An initial check of the vehicle plates with the National Law Enforcement Terminal System reported the vehicle as stolen," according to a base statement Tuesday. "Security forces responded as trained, and executed high-risk traffic stop procedures. Further investigation of the full vehicle information number revealed the vehicle was not stolen."
(snip)
"We sincerely regret the fact that their enjoyable day at the museum ended with this high-risk traffic stop," their statement read. "Had the vehicle not originally come back as stolen, this situation would have been resolved with a quick courtesy stop of the vehicle to clarify the initial report."
(Excerpt) Read more at daytondailynews.com ...
“My instructor long ago told us never point a gun at anything you didn’t want to shoot”
Weapons training 101.
Actually, they would have had to approach the vehicle and question why they were driving a stolen vehicle. Remember, at the time of the stop, the information in the hands of the police indicated that the vehicle was stolen. It was only a subsequent check of the VIN Number that revealed that the vehicle was not stolen.
If they had drawn a weapon on somebody for just cruising the parking lot, that might be an over-reaction. But I have driven around that very parking lot, for the very same reason, looking at out-of-state plates, and I only got followed by a patrol vehicle until I exited the base.
When the patrol vehicle showed up in my rearview, it dawned on me that my driving around looking at license plates might look a little suspicious, so I waved at the guards and departed, being very careful to stop at all the signs and follow all the speed limits. I guess my license plate came up clean, or it would have been me handcuffed on the side of the road. I would have been OK with that.
The rest of your post is just more ranting at these officers for doing something they didn't do. Yes, cops sometimes shoot dogs. Yes, cops sometimes rough people up. That did not happen here.
WE are the ones with the guns. WE can do what we want when we want. WE are tge federal government. Don’t forget it kids. Enjoy your visit.
I think your response is the best one.
I too question the entire mind set of the responding personnel, their supervisors, and the base commander.
First, it sounds as if vehicles “cruising” the parking lot looking at license plates is a common occurrence. I wonder if the SP quality control people and/or base exercise teams test the responding officers reactions to just such a situation? When I was an AF base exercise team chief in the mid 1980’s not all of my SP response scenarios required an high intensity response. With base wide exercise once every quarter you can cover a lot of scenarios and different responses.
Second, what is the probability of a terrorist attack on Wright-Patt? Not every place in the CONUS is under the same level of terrorist threat. Proof? Why did September 11, 2001 happen where it did and not elsewhere? But, the bureaucratic mind set is one size must fit all regardless of how stupid or painful. That mind set creates incidents like this all too easily. BTW that mind set isn’t limited to the DOD.
Finally, despite the PAO’s response nothing has changed, nor will it. The best way to prevent this, or something worse, from happening again is some very vigorous PT for everyone from the responding SPs to the base commander - 20 laps around the fence in full chem protective gear comes to mind. Why do I want the base commander to join this fun run? His command authority extends well beyond his desk top and office; but, like most commanders he spends all too little time outside his office seeing what is really going on. The image is there but, as this non-fatal (by the grace of God) incident proves, the reality ain’t!
What is the probability of a terrorist attack on the Marine Barracks at Beruit Airport?
What is the probability of a terrorist attack on the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City?
What is the probability of a terrorist attack on a German disco frequented by GIs?
What is the probability of a terrorist attack on Fort Hood?
What is the probability of a terrorist attack on the Washington Navy Yard?
What is the probability of another terrorist attack on Fort Hood?
Here's a fun experiment you can try at home. Report your own car stolen, wait a couple of days, and then blow through a stop sign in front of one of your local cops. I bet the response you get will make the response of these MPs look positively restrained.
I suspect the fact that they were women and children accounts for the remarkable level of restraint.
So otherwise they would have just shot them on sight?
What would they have done ‘unrestrained’?
A plain reading of the article would indicate to me that the police requested that they exit the vehicle and cuffed the adults as they stood on the side of the road, while they investigated the suspected stolen vehicle.
For a suspected stolen vehicle on a military base, I would consider that restrained.
If it had been a single young male driving the vehicle, I would not be surprised to see the driver forcefully pulled from the vehicle and cuffed behind the back as he lies face down in the ditch.
And that includes pointing guns at children?
See that there's a granny and kids . . . say "O Sh!t! . . .", keep an eye on 'em while you check the registration . . . then say "Sorry folks, a computer glitch." and give them a personal tour of the museum.
FYI
I couldn't agree more.
There is no indication that anybody pointed a gun at a child in this case. If it had happened, I suspect it would have been in the article.
And if there were in the article, surely Timber Rattler would’ve quoted that portion
“Hill said the officers pulled guns on the family...”
That generic statement is what you are going to hang your hat on? That means the same thing as they pointed a gun at a child?
Listen to yourself...
I only read the excerpt above. I'm not trying to prove anything. It is stated that they pulled their guns. Rather than point them at the ground, I think it is likely they pointed them at the occupants of the car. The children are part of the family and were in the car... Voilà.
The MPs went home safe at the end of the shift. That’s the important thing.
Not sure I want to now, Jimmah.
No, thank you. Having loaded guns pointed at me and being handcuffed is not my cup of tea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.