7 ms·
Either the automatic weapons used by the SWAT teams belong to the police --in which case the SWAT teams are certainly government entities,-- or they belong to t
by hamiltonkibbe 12y ago
Either the automatic weapons used by the SWAT teams belong to the police --in which case the SWAT teams are certainly government entities,-- or they belong to the 501(c)3, in which case we should lock everyone up for just as long as we would lock up a gangbanger who's killed multiple people and gets caught with a fully automatic weapon.
- 67726e 12y agoI obviously do not know how these LECs are setup legally speaking, but it is possible to own and operate fully automatic weapons legally as a civilian or business. You can get a tax stamp from the ATF for a few hundred dollars. As an example, my local commercial gun range offers rentals for fully automatic assault rifles and submachine guns at their ranges. That said, this LEC charade is sickening and they should be punished as severely as the law allows. Of course it's America and the police can and do get away with murder so that'll never happen. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Firearms_License http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Firearms_License http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act
- hamiltonkibbe 12y agoNot if that civilian/business has committed a felony...
- mey 12y agoCan a business commit a felony? Edit: Legally I mean. Typically the felony falls on the chain of command in my limited legal understanding. Edit2: In the US
- hamiltonkibbe 12y agoWell no, but people acting as agents of a business can
- anaptdemise 12y agoSo just to start, I hope you watch the SyFy series Continuum[1]. The basic synopsis is that in the future, governments and economies collapse and the "Corporations" bail everyone out. I mean, you trust your personal information to FB way faster than you do with the GVT. Anyways... So, my very limited understanding of civil/city/state governments is that they are already special forms of "Non-Profit Corporate Entities" in most states, "Municipal Corporations"[2]. All other "private law enforcement entities" derive from some variation/bastardization of these laws depending on the state. So yes, most private citizens/corporations, what ever definition of the term[3], can obtain any of the weapons described in the article, with limits/exceptions. For instance, the SWAT team of Dallas, TX is part of the Dallas Police Department (Dallas being a Municipal Corporation). I chose this as an example because, when you google Dallas SWAT, you either get a reality TV show or a Facebook Page. In most smaller counties, it is part of the county Sherifs Department. In most states, the only person that can arrest a Sherif is the Governor or Agent of The Federal Government. Stay with me. This is all an argument of semantics from the beginning. US entities operating outside the US borders obtain literally what ever equipment they, or their clients, can afford. Further, they are either bound by US Military rules of conduct (rules of engagement), beholden to local law, or either/neither seemingly as the parties see fit [see current US military advisor rules in Iraq vs. Blackwater authorization in Op. Iraqi Freedom]. My reading of this article is the scenario last referenced on US soil. A claim that a local SWAT team is both and neither. The power of a government law enforcement agency with the "loosely defined rights" of a private corporation (individual.) It is "risk management" in the corporate sense. You structure yourself for greatest legal/financial protection/benefit. Grey area -- rant. Expand this to the Federal Government... The FBI is the only organization that is authorized to investigate wrong doing within itself[4]. In addition, the federal government can chose whether or not you are aloud to sue them in federal court (all courts by proxy.)[5] [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1954347/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1954347/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_corporation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_corporation [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Elec... [4] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/19/us/in-150-shootings-the-fbi-deemed-agents-faultless.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/19/us/in-150-shootings-the-fb... [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_Unite...
- snomad 12y agoUBS (Japan unit) admitted conducting a felony. http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/2012/12/21/ubs-felony-plea-in-libor-deal-ushers-in-tougher-enforcement-era/ http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/2012/12/...
- ksherlock 12y agoArthur Andersen was convicted of obstruction of justice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen#Enron_scandal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen#Enron_scandal). (the decision was later reversed by the SCOTUS). The SEC bars convicts from auditing public companies which pretty much put them out of business. Sorry haskell, it was done for the side effects.
- justizin 12y agoi don't know the details, but this seems not to apply to licensed police officers. Johannes Mehserle, for instance, was convicted of involuntary manslaughter while on duty as a BART cop, but it's my understanding that he has continued to serve in a new police department. obviously, this is atrocious.
- yardie 12y agoAFAIK, Mehserle is still unable to become a LEO due to his conviction and loss of appeal [1]. Of course, he still might work for a police department as parking enforcement or receptionist. But he'll never be legally able to hold a gun ever again. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Mehserle#Appeal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Mehserle#Appeal
- gnu8 12y agoUnder that theory the 501(c)(3) org would only be able to procure and register NFA weapons that were registered before 1986, which would be very expensive and not practical. Only actual law enforcement agencies can register post-1986 weapons (or FFL holders that deal in such weapons).
- tedks 12y agoYou can't legally shoot at people. No non-profit, no matter how regulated by the ATF, can break down doors in the night, shoot your dog, flash-bang your infant, and ransack your house. ...right? ...I guess I don't know. Maybe the situation has gone that far. No way of really knowing; America is a place fully without the rule of law at this point, and it's whatever the men with guns say goes.
- Cthulhu_ 12y agoI'm guessing that Swat Inc. gets a permit (or some other legal construct) allowing them to act as police officers. A bit like an extreme version of citizen's arrest.
- rhizome 12y agoPretty sure this is just a delaying tactic, the LEC being set up for legal insulation more than anything. Law enforcement always gets the kid gloves.