Originally Posted by SgtScott31 (Post 9845006)

I have been in the field long enough to know what I can and cannot do, and what will hold in the courts in my area. With a 100% conviction rate on my part, I am more than happy to do what I need to do.

Originally Posted by ralfp (Post 9857655)

100%? All people that you cited or arrested have been found guilty of the charges that you cited or arrested them for? Somehow I doubt that.

Originally Posted by ralfp (Post 9857655)

100%? All people that you cited or arrested have been found guilty of the charges that you cited or arrested them for? Somehow I doubt that.

Originally Posted by red456 (Post 9848479)

Aren't the cops at airports usually from the bottom of the barrel?

Originally Posted by Wally Bird (Post 9852141)

It depends on whether the airport cops are a detachment of a City or County PD or are a dedicated Airport or Port Authority PD. The latter are more likely to consist of personnel who could not get into a 'real' force. Gross generalization I concede, based solely on my local experience.

Either way it's a pretty cushy number compared to patrolling say, Compton or Liberty City. Not much chance of encountering serious crime, which is why they welcome the terrorist threat as it enhances their sense of self importance. In any case, Hill Street Blues they ain't.

Originally Posted by TMOliver (Post 9857430)

More than all that, as a Conservative, a supporter of consistent and appropriate law enforcement (and for the record for 8 years a City Council member and also a former member of an airport board and in my twilight years relegated to the second team as a member of the board of the Convention Center - security but not yet terrorists), I strongly suggest that to preserve the fiscal integrity of the local airport authority from costly litigation (and from the potential of his being named personally in a lawsuit), he would be wise to spend a little time, 2 or 3 hours of intensive briefing, with a skilled litigator with experience in municipal/governmental representation on the existence of a variety of federal and state court decisions (and even a few statutes on the books) that raise serious questions of his current perspectives and in some cases rash opinions.

Thankfully, be it in the military police, the shore patrol, the TSA or what is apparently an "Airport Police Agency" on an airport operated by a quasi-governmental authority, about as "private" as the water fountain outside City Council's chambers, SGTs don't yet make law, although have been known to impetuously and excessively enforce it.

Were I a hearty Libertarian searching for methods to demonstrate the sacred nature of individual rights, I'd encourage some young lass to whup out her digital and photograph away, simply looking to be apprehending for "blocking security", but accompanied by adequate witnesses to establish in court that the blocking alleged was purely a creation of the SGT's adversarial views toward permissible actions in public places. Ensuing would be one of those test cases which make the media ever so happy, cause city attorneys and prosecutors to tear out their hair, and insure that solemn judges meet out verbal chastisement against errant LEOs.

Sadly, I'm no longer that sort of crusader and will simply wait for the day when some poor buffoon gets unwarrantedly thumped by the SGT who is then transferred to painting the cross-hatching on traffic lanes where driving is banned...

Originally Posted by SgtScott31 (Post 9845006)

I am done with this thread. I am not in the convincing business for those who are set in their ways. I have been in the field long enough to know what I can and cannot do, and what will hold in the courts in my area. With a 100% conviction rate on my part, I am more than happy to do what I need to do.

Originally Posted by FWAAA (Post 9867584)

I want to avoid calling you names, but it looks like we can add "Can't keep his word" to the list. Better that than the dreaded "L" word, right?