Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...


Everything but tech support.

2144, 25 May 22

Biden Responds to Shooting by… *checks notes*… Cracking Down on Police?

You can’t make this up.

The executive order signed by Biden will create a new national database that contains records of federal officer misconduct, including convictions, terminations, de-certifications, civil judgments, resignations and retirements while under investigation for serious misconduct.

It also requires all federal law enforcement agencies to revise use-of-force policies, banning chokeholds and restricting the use of no-knock warrants — two tactics that were widely criticized following the deaths of Floyd and Taylor.


2144, 25 May 2022


  1. Tuerqas

    You really can’t can you? So more than 50% of all murders are repeat offenses, but let’s keep letting murderers out and forgetting their names and start keeping track of the police and former police officers with misconduct offenses…Yep, makes perfect sense.

  2. jonnyv

    GOOD! This isn’t an either/or situation. Currently the police have an awful reputation in many areas, sometimes for good reason… most times not. When you have the power that the police have over individuals, there needs to be checks on them. If keeping track of “the bad apples” in the policing system BOTHERS you, I think that you need to look inside yourself and ask why?

  3. Tuerqas

    Doesn’t bother me at all. It just isn’t the priority Biden put on it. I ASSume you are concerned about the steeply rising violent crime in Milwaukee and the US in general, and police shortage is a big concern. Adding new trackers and databases to be used against police that may make even just 1 or 2% more retire early or leave and another percentage not sign up in the first place does not seem like the right fix for the new heights of violent crime rates going on at this time. It SEEMS like a better move would be to add trackers and databases to the career criminals. And if I were seeking re-elections for my Party, I would err on the side of attacking the criminals (staying away from their race, of course) rather than the relatively few truly ‘bad apples’ on the national police force.

    The people like you that are MORE concerned about the bad police than they are about the climbing array of criminals will already vote Democrat pretty much guaranteed. This is one where knowing the real motive the Dem Party has does not really add up for me. The only thing I can think of is that the political leaders know Dem constituents get bored or complacent and/or have buyers remorse from the last elections or are just plain lazy if there isn’t a racist they can call up to get that vote out. They generally save the riots for Presidential election years so I am guessing this is the closest they will get to anger in the mid-terms.

  4. Kevin Scheunemann

    Biden wets the bed again. Psaki not there to clean up anymore.

  5. jonnyv

    T. I said it wasn’t an either/or situation. Addressing rising crime rates all over the country is an issue that needs to be looked at. It should be addressed as many avenues as possible. From policing, to sentencing, to community outreach. And we do have databases for career criminals. You can search many of their records publicly. Can I do that for police officers?

    I am fairly certain that I read that police budgets are at an all time high. How is it that we are struggling to add additional officers? Some of it has to do with the job requirements, it sucks to be a cop. Labor in general is hard to find.

    And your “truly few bad apples”. Maybe now we will actually find out how many bad apples there are. One bad apple in a position of power can turn an entire city against you. I have no issues with more restrictions and monitoring. It NEEDS to happen to help re-establish trust, Back in the 00’s MPD abused overtime rules and some officers pulled in TWICE their salary. Costing taxpayers MILLIONS. Thankfully we have put some restrictions on OT now in the department for some scenarios. But there is still plenty of room for abuse and it happens. How many MORE officers could we afford if we started cracking down on that? Maybe if we enforced Act 10 on the police unions we could help with that… **crickets**

    A buddy of mine is in MPD. I think he is a Sargent now, honestly don’t remember. He is a wonderful human. But, I have also seen police officers that are complete dicks. I have seen officers turn on their lights just to avoid traffic lights. I have seen them harass teenagers who didn’t do anything. They have a difficult job, but if you can’t do the difficult job and continue to act like a pro… get out.

  6. dad29

    police budgets are at an all time high

    Not everywhere, but when starting pay (as in Milwaukee) is just north of $50K/year plus a benefit program that would choke a horse, there are problems. Granted that the cop shop can’t take everyone who applies, and granted that the job requires both physical and mental agility, that’s a hefty price. Side-note: met a fellow who was a police officer in a small Georgia town who nearly had a coronary arrest when I told him what Milwaukee cops are paid, plus the “30 and out” pension, yadayada. His comp wasn’t on the same planet–which may account for some of the problems, too.

  7. Mar

    This is just a farce. What do you think the odds are that the Capitol cop who murdered Ashlie Babbit will be on the list?

  8. jonnyv

    Mar. I do hope that incidents like that are added as well. But as the Republican Rep Mullin said he “didn’t have a choice.” She was trying to breach the Speakers Lobby. Unfortunately she made her crazy decision and paid the ultimate price for it.

    And it sounds like Biden enacted this faster than the Uvalde police did. The story of the mother that was handcuffed, released, climbed the school fence, ran in and got her kids out of the school is amazing and insane. 40 minutes (conflicting reports on exact amount of time) while they waited for another team. We are lucky that the perp barricaded himself inside a room and didn’t cause more damage.

  9. dad29

    She was trying to breach the Speakers Lobby.

    Rules for Use of Deadly Force: Use deadly force ONLY when 1) your life or the life of others is in IMMINENT DANGER or 2) You or another are in IMMINENT DANGER of grave bodily harm.

    Those rules apply to everyone, not just civilians/self-defense.

    That cop murdered her for TRESPASSING? And you approve? God help you if you trespass on my property?

    Be serious.

  10. jonnyv

    Dad29. Yes, the officer gave directions for her to stop. She was attempting to crawl thru a barricaded door’s window. If after multiple warnings someone is STILL attempting to get to you, what do you THINK their intent is? From the officer’s perspective, I can understand if he and the people he was protecting were in danger. This went beyond trespassing, they physically pushed their way into the building. There was a clear intent on doing damage and possibly physical harm. The use of deadly force sucks for everyone involved, but this woman wasn’t “just trespassing”. Go and watch the video again.

  11. dad29

    The accurate quote is not “in danger.” It is “in danger of life or grave bodily harm.”

    The officer is a murderer, pal. She was trespassing, and you have NO other charges you could bring against her. “Pushing through a window” is not endangering life or committing grave bodily harm.

    He is a chickenshit murderer.

  12. Mar

    Johnny, then why did no other cop fire their gun during the mostly peaceful protest? Some cops hot attacked and they could have fired but didn’t.
    The cop was not in danger because as you said she was crawling through the window and cop did not shoot her at close range.
    And for your reading pleasure:

  13. Tuerqas

    >T. I said it wasn’t an either/or situation.

    Yes you did, and I answered it with “It just isn’t the priority Biden put on it. ” When crime is spiraling upward, you emphasize problems solving the increase in crime first and inhibiting police work won’t help. Whine about it as racism all you want, but the cop killings, cop murders and most all other homicides happen in the same minority neighborhoods and nicer police won’t change that until the minorities step up and start caring for those neighborhoods.
    My point was that Biden and Dem politicians are treating it like an either/or situation as they are not supporting police, they are blaming them and working to leash them further. If you are their base, you either don’t see that and are satisfied with what Dems are doing or you do see that and acknowledge that you are dissatisfied with that aspect of your leadership. I can’t tell which from your commentary.

  14. jonnyv

    If you think that this “inhibits” the police in any way… you are out of your mind. Keeping track of officers that abuse the system, their position, or their power isn’t stopping ANY cop from doing their job. You are acting as if people can only do ONE thing at a time. I am sorry if you have to sit while chewing bubblegum, the rest of the world can take a multifaceted approach to problems in our society. Maybe people will take better care of their neighborhoods when they feel like they can trust the police officers that show up to do their job? If there is a “todo” list to solving the increasing crime, this seems like a very easy one to check off the list.

  15. Tuerqas

    Do I think new rules and monitoring may make some people not apply to be an officer or some officers to retire early or quit, thus inhibiting us from increasing police presences that may save lives? Absolutely yes (some of them the bad ones, so yea for that). So we can each think the other is crazy and you do not have see what is before you at all. Closing your eyes and believing the liberal powers that be is the liberal way, after all.
    A dam has broken. Yes, there are many steps to fixing it and many tasks can begin at the same time, it takes a mere simpleton to point that out. But gathering stones to repair it would not be my first priority or the first thing I would allocate money to. I would first try to save the lives of all the distressed people downriver. You choose to hire stone gatherers first, cool, cool, cool.
    It is called ‘priorities’. Maybe you should take your gum out before responding.

    >Maybe people will take better care of their neighborhoods when they feel like they can trust the police officers that show up to do their job?

    I own a dam that makes a lot of money, but I don’t want it anymore. Want to buy it cheap?
    At least you had the decency to preface it with ‘Maybe’.

  16. jonnyv

    T. As I have stated over and over, there are different approaches. Your dam analogy isn’t assumes immediate danger, and that isn’t necessarily accurate. How broken is the dam? How much danger are the people in? Can one person be gathering stones while another is warning the people? Again, this isn’t a linear problem.

    And I personally have ZERO issue if someone decides not be be in law enforcement because they fear that if they screw up OR are genuinely bad people, they will be on some gov’t database. If there is a question on your own ethics, law enforcement isn’t the job for you. Just like any job, if there are fewer applicants, that will raise the value and then the salary of job until we get more applicants. Supply & demand.

  17. Tuerqas

    >T. As I have stated over and over, there are different approaches. Your dam analogy isn’t assumes immediate danger, and that isn’t necessarily accurate.

    I am going to assume you are just being stubborn, tongue in cheek, or something else akin rather than that unutterably stupid. Or maybe I shouldn’t. So if I had just been more descriptive? I’ll re-write:

    A dam has broken. 206,344,884 tons of water are rushing down on three cities with populations of 985,231 and 264,348 and 88,647 and 184,612 others are living in the projected afflicted area. Yes, there are many steps to fixing it and many tasks can begin at the same time, it takes a mere simpleton to point that out. But gathering concrete and rebar quotes to repair it would not be my first priority or the first thing I would allocate money to. I would first try to save the lives of all the distressed people downriver. You choose to interview and hire contractors first, cool, cool, cool. Is that better?
    You know, because if you hire one poor contractor we’ll just have to do this again in several years, so clearly that is the priority right now while the water is rushing down the valley. And the parallel is the same. Crime is rising dramatically and people are being hurt in much greater waves while Biden and you, his faithful supporter, believe the first priority is to bleed the police departments of people and recruits first because some of them might be bad, rather than, say, just concerned that Government is gathering power for profit rather than to help the people.
    I do get it. No matter what level of bleeding heart any cop starts out as, the job cures them of it. So police tend to end up being conservative rather than liberal and Biden wants less of them. And you say yes like a good little lib. Sure there are different approaches, and each approach may prioritize differently. I am saying Biden’s is bad for the people because his priorities are to gain power for the Democratic Party.

Pin It on Pinterest