North Texas motorists stoped by Feds to take DNA and blood

[Cedar Park Dad]

I wonder if a Burger King owner could hire off-duty officers to direct motorists into his drive-thru. They wouldn't be forced to buy anything; they could just say they're not interested and move on.

Well, I think I just discovered a new way to get more foot traffic into our church. Just close off 620 and Steiner Ranch and move all traffic through the parking lot. You can leave if you show a pew sheet and can summarize the sermon...

They say God works in mysterious ways...

Of course right before they leave the parking lot you could have a few more officers holding offering buckets.

Ewww...self funding! Now thats capital thinking there.

[Abraham]

Only two (I think) LEO's have commented and both seem to think nothing wrong was done.

Generally, other former or retired LEO's speak up on things LEO related.

Their silence is deafening.

So, I guess they think this sort of preying on innocent civilians is O.K. too.

Way to go...

[cb1000rider]

Only two (I think) LEO's have commented and both seem to think nothing wrong was done.

Don't put words into their mouths and don't take the misdeeds of another officer out on them. They're not the LEOs that did this stuff and they're not part of the same department.
As wrong as it was to do, I'm unaware of any arrests that came out of it. Inconvenient, oppressive (maybe), but did it do any lasting harm to anyone? I don't support it, but there are bigger problems to look at.

I think the department got the messages as they responded to complaints - not really accepting blame.

[Redneck_Buddha]

Only two (I think) LEO's have commented and both seem to think nothing wrong was done.

Don't put words into their mouths and don't take the misdeeds of another officer out on them. They're not the LEOs that did this stuff and they're not part of the same department.
As wrong as it was to do, I'm unaware of any arrests that came out of it. Inconvenient, oppressive (maybe), but did it do any lasting harm to anyone? I don't support it, but there are bigger problems to look at.

I think the department got the messages as they responded to complaints - not really accepting blame.

If they didn't accept the blame, they didn't get the message. And I'm a bit surprised that you you use the term "oppressive" in the same sentence as "no lasting harm". Does the term "incrementalism" mean anything to you? And I do see lasting harm here...to our liberties which are in more and more jeopardy by the week.

[cb1000rider]

Incrementalism means a lot to me. However, this got swatted in the public view, albeit without the department officially apologizing. If you were hoping that it got spun into a bigger deal, we'd need to see an arrest out of it - or some other fruits of the poisoned tree that are actionable. I mean what outcome do you want? The department cut it out. Fire the officers? Sure they bad choices, but I don't think they should be career ending ones. No everyone agrees.

We're all armchair here. I don't approve of these actions and we have that in common. It just makes my hair stand up at like a 3 out of 10 versus a 8 out of 10, that's all. My perspective maybe different as I've been through much more aggressive and oppressive tactics.

The LEOs on this forum take a lot of heat, but I'm glad they are here. I think it takes a strong stomach for them to stick around. It gives us civilians a valuable point of interaction and also shows that they share some common interests. I just don't think we should tie them in by proxy, that's all. I've never seen them hold a strong line of support for all LEO actions and indicating that they do so - well, you'll need to show me. Besides, the media loves to spin and until we hear both sides, it's easy to judge incorrectly.

[VoiceofReason]

What would they have done if someone was obviously hammered? Would they suddenly be “on duty” and arrest the person? A police officer would not be expected to allow a very drunk person to drive away.

If they were injured while off duty working this job, who would pay the medical FW, NHTSA, or the contractor?

This is just wrong in so many ways.

[suthdj]

Maybe the problem is the LEO's serving in an unoffical/offical capicity. If they want to work off shift lose the uniform an car those are offical symbols of power and should only be used for offical business.

[jmra]

What would they have done if someone was obviously hammered? Would they suddenly be “on duty” and arrest the person? A police officer would not be expected to allow a very drunk person to drive away.

If they were injured while off duty working this job, who would pay the medical FW, NHTSA, or the contractor?

This is just wrong in so many ways.

working security somewhere off duty is one thing, this is something very different.

[jmra]

Maybe the problem is the LEO's serving in an unoffical/offical capicity. If they want to work off shift lose the uniform an car those are offical symbols of power and should only be used for offical business.

[VMI77]

The LEOs weren't administering any tests from what I read/watched.

They directed them into the parking lot. NHTSA folks spoke with them.

here's the problem (for example):

1. a teen is now late for school after lunch

2. a woman is now late for a doctor appt.

3. a man is late to work and is FIRED.

4. a mom out driving around to get her baby to sleep, now has a screaming baby in her back seat.

all because they didn't give any of these people a choice as to whether or not to go into the parking lot.

All valid problems, but not the worst problems by a long shot: every encounter with the police, while armed, especially in a vehicle, is a possible deadly encounter. We hear all the time on this forum about how some officers overreact to someone with a CHL. Some members recently expressed concerns about their ability to hear and respond properly to commands in potentially charged situations. I personally have been stopped several times and each time the officer has been professional and courteous, and apparently not particularly concerned about me being armed; however, that experience is apparently not universal.

[goose]

Did any of the LEO playing along respond to the use of officers with flashing lights to divert a street's traffic through a comercial enterprise? Burger King was mentioned. I'd like to hear a response to the validity of that scenario. Would the LEO playing along feel comfortable taking that gig?

[stevem]

Maybe the problem is the LEO's serving in an unoffical/offical capicity. If they want to work off shift lose the uniform an car those are offical symbols of power and should only be used for offical business.

This will never happen, it's de facto personnel funding for most departments. Allows them to pay officers poorly by subsidizing their "off-duty" security job with use of the car etc.

What needs to happen is better guidance and oversight of what jobs are appropriately "subsidized", and frankly the officers involved in this incident need to be disciplined as an example to others of what not to do. I'd like to see the TX AG come out with a position letter against this too. Bad judgment itself should have consequences, even if minor, not a complete whitewash in the name of "it didn't turn out too bad".

[Cedar Park Dad]

Those who approved it should be fired. If no one approved it then the troopers who actually did it should be fired. If they had permission they should be suspended as "just following orders" is not an excuse, so "hey the boss said I could" doesn't cut it either.

[gigag04]

Those who approved it should be fired. If no one approved it then the troopers who actually did it should be fired. If they had permission they should be suspended as "just following orders" is not an excuse, so "hey the boss said I could" doesn't cut it either.

Seems fair. I think they should burn down their homes too and take away their kids so that those vile offenders can't taint the next generation.

[texanjoker]

Those who approved it should be fired. If no one approved it then the troopers who actually did it should be fired. If they had permission they should be suspended as "just following orders" is not an excuse, so "hey the boss said I could" doesn't cut it either.

Seems fair. I think they should burn down their homes too and take away their kids so that those vile offenders can't taint the next generation.

It is rather concerning that people believe everything they read in the liberal media. One would think people would want factual information vs jumping on the bandwagon without proof of any wrong doing. Just a thought, but the same liberal media thinks Obama is the greatest thing to happen to the US. Does that mean we are surrounded by Obama supporters?