Police Brutality: An Experimental View

You’re likely familiar with the Milgram Experiment, which found that many obey the orders given by someone perceived to be an authority, even when it’s believed to be at to the detriment of another, and especially when personal responsibility was said to be absolved.

The Stanford Prison Experiment echoed those take-aways, as study participants internalized their roles of prisoner or guard to an extent that researcher Philip Zimbardo noted had commonalities with the prisoner abuse that happened at Abu Ghraib.

Think about how that obedience to authority impacts us today. Someone caged in supermax facility obviously isn’t physically free. But are you, not behind the walls of a supermax, free? Truly free? Or is it more accurate to say that you are freer?


In the document below, Davi – who’s behind Bitcoin Not Bombs, which through BTC donations, will help to clothe hundreds in San Fran, and who spearheaded the Cop Block natural law enforcement badge – outlines what he calls a renegade experiment that aims to discern the impact that police-as-authority paradigm has on as demonstrated by the willingness to intervene in a situation when the aggressor dons a badge and costume verses a situation when the aggressor dons “regular” clothes. Here are a few excerpts:

We are living in an increasingly militarized society, and I would argue that this has a primarily psychological cause, not merely a political cause. If allowed to continue this could have disastrous consequences, as it has throughout history. . .

The militarization of society cannot be fought only with votes, or with cameras, or even with rifles, if the underlying impulses for compliance are not first addressed in the mind of every subject who slavishly accepts their subjugation. . .

The researched speculated that the vicious cycle of power and hypocrisy could be broken by attacking the legitimacy of power, rather than the power itself. . .

Human nature is essentially adaptive. If you take an otherwise good person and put them in a role that incentivizes evil they will adapt to the new role. And if you deeply internalize “obedience to authority” as a core personality trait you will become capable of the worst forms fo murder, and tolerant of the worst forms of abuse. . .

[W]hen atrocities are committed by militarized societies the perpetrators are usually a minority of the population, and the victims are usually a minority of the population, but the passive witnesses are the majority, and thereby the most capable of meaningful intervention

If, after becoming familiar with Davi’s objectives, if you have suggestions for him on how to make for a more sound study, or if you want to help fund the associated costs, hit him up: davi@bitcoinnotbombs.com




Pete Eyre

Pete Eyre is co-founder of CopBlock.org. As an advocate of peaceful, consensual interactions, he seeks to inject a message of complete liberty and self-government into the conversation of police accountability.

Eyre went to undergrad and grad school for law enforcement, then spent time in DC as an intern at the Cato Institute, a Koch Fellow at the Drug Policy Alliance, Directer of Campus Outreach at the Institute for Humane Studies, Crasher-in-Chief at Bureaucrash, and as a contractor for the Future of Freedom Foundation.

In 2009 he left the belly of the beast and hit the road with Motorhome Diaries and later co-founded Liberty On Tour. He spent time in New Hampshire home, and was involved with Free Keene, the Free State Project and The Daily Decrypt.

  • steve


  • t

    Wow. What a smelly pile. On this site it has already been disproven that the police in the US have been “militarized” for whatever that means. We’ve also shown the light of truth on the class idea that there is an “army of police” in this country

    Now there is a movement to better arm the police to help us meet the growing threat. In a town near where I live the police responded to a drug related shooting with an AK when they were armed only with pistols. As a result / response several civic groups in the that town arenow banding together to raise funds to buy some patrol rifles for the officers to have access to. Hardly the “militarization” talked about.

    Just another misleading article by someone who has been led astray.

  • muffins99

    more misleading denial drivel spewed by paid troll whose job it is to force you to obey his view lmao i would rather believe my lyin eyes thank you, btw should’nt t be off washing their new armored truck or something?

  • t

    Wish we had a new one.

  • steve

    Bullshit t, the police in this country have been militarized.Collectively they have become an army and an intelegence force throughout the nation. 1st they are using military vehicles and 2nd they are sharing information over the net that the public are not privy to. The fact they use m4a1 is nothing I believe police should be armed however the 50s and the heavy stuff need be left to the military. Not just the heavy stuff but the black hawks to. It’s also the mentality they are being taught is very military.

  • steve

    I just realized the troll has gone and now we can agree to disagree with one another without the carnage.wqw

  • JGriffin

    First off you tards, there are more armed US citizens that are better armed than their local PD’s. To say that the police are now a militarized army is a fucking joke and y’all need to drink some more of your kool-aid that Ademo, Pete Eyre, Dr. Q and all the other cop blockers are feeding you. You say that people who support cops are sheep, you are the sheep. You believe all this dribble that they feed you, when the fact of the matter is that more people support LEO’s than will ever support your fucked up cause. So keep on putting out your propaganda. See people notice all the BS stories that are you tards post, but most of them never have any follow up when they show the cops were justified in their actions or when someone sues the cops and loses. Sure, every now and then there are incidents of police brutality just like there are incidents of brutality in the households or neighborhoods, which I’d like to point out happen more often then police brutality. But keep posting your dribble as it gives a lot of us a good laugh.

  • steve

    JGriffen your just as bad and ignorent as the cop blockers you hate.

  • JGriffin

    You just keep thinking that.

  • John Q Public

    These guys have been smoking too much dope and watching “The Wall” too many times. Most agencies in my neck of the woods have the same AR-15 that any civilian can buy which does not have full auto or burst capabilities. The “AR” in AR-15 does not stand for “assault rifle” by the way. It stands for “Armalite Rifle” after the company that originally made them. The military vehicles are old surplus Humvees or M113’s. Hardly “assault” vehicles. The M113 has been around since Vietnam. Not exactly state of the art. I have seen where some MRAPs are being issued. Those are pretty much armored cars and not “assault” vehicles. The only agency I know of that’s using UH-60 Blackhawks is the US Border Patrol. Most civilian law enforcement agencies couldn’t afford the upkeep for those helicopters. They are primarily used for transport anyhow. The AH-64 Apache is an attack helicopter and is only used by the military. If the police started getting M-1 Abrams tanks and M-2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles, then I’d be worried. That’s just not happening. So, just because agencies get used military equipment does not make them “militarized” at all. Quit drinking the copblocker koolaid.

  • John Q Public

    Wow, way to show a Chinese T-55 tank in Tiananmen Square. That’s in China, not the US by the way. I know you copblockers are going to say that the US is becoming like communist China. I call bullshit. Its been shown again and again on this site what a joke you guys are.

  • t

    JQP: They really think TV is real. Its funny but really, really sad.

  • Shawn


    “Wow. What a smelly pile. On this site it has already been disproven that the police in the US have been “militarized” for whatever that means.”

    No, you simply disagree with it. You automatically disagree with anything critical of cops.

    “You believe all this dribble that they feed you, when the fact of the matter is that more people support LEO’s than will ever support your fucked up cause.”

    In other words, only people who agree with cops are thinking individuals. No one could possibly disagree with cops?

    Oh, and by the way guys. Military is more than just equipment. It is attitude, tactics, and mission.
    Example? Last year a suspected meth lab was raided. No lab existed. Cops managed to burn a small girl with a flash bang. Supposedly a safe weapon, but that is a lie. It is still dangerous. It was used knowing that it could harm someone. Now that is fine for military use. But using a dangerous military device and tactic in a civilian environment? That is different.

  • certain

    “So, just because agencies get used military equipment does not make them “militarized” at all.”

    Really? Then what would it make them? And which non-cops among the general public can own fully automatic weapons? And don’t start quoting FFL Class 3 nonsense, as I said the general public. But your quote above is really, really funny.

  • Ariel

    I think part of it is the new look to urban police departments; the uniforms closely resemble military work uniforms (at least they are finally wearing sensible shoes). The other is the SWAT look, especially including masks. It leads to a perception of militarization, a separation of police from community.

    As an aside, regarding masks, there is a case recently where a multiple raid went bad on one house. The different teams all maintain they never went to that house, and the masks make identification of specific officers impossible. Combine that with all their denials…

  • Ariel


    “No, you simply disagree with it. You automatically disagree with anything critical of cops.” Yeah, he mistakes his disagreement with absolute reality. Nothing new there.

    JGriffen gave the usual fallacy of numbers. A majority of Russians believe Putin is right. They also back the latest crackdown on homosexuals. If what was right and moral was determined solely by numbers, there would be no reason for a moral code. If a majority believes x, then x is true and moral. When a majority believe y is true and moral, then y is true and moral, even if it contradicts x. Slavery and Jim Crow were based on that false concept.

    Damn, I didn’t think of this earlier: ” It is attitude, tactics, and mission.” It’s that quality not quantity problem.

  • Ariel


    A flash-bang is a low-level grenade without the shrapnel. It starts fires and, as one FBI agent found out, causes serious injury if too close. It’s an explosive, but flash-bang is a great euphemism.

  • t

    Shawn: No. I don’t immediately disagree with anything critical of the police. I am critical of the police and hold them to a high standard.

    This is a “stinky pile” because it is pattenly untrue. How many times do you have to be told / shown before you quit letting people lead you around by the nose?

    My department has around 750 guys. My last patrol squad had 8 guys (including me). Lots of times that left me with 5 guys to handle an area with about 40,000 residents. I had 2 guys that regularly signed out a shotgun. Everyone else just had pistols. Hardly a “militarized” army if police there is it? Now the department has 3 full time SWAT teams where they go out with a couple of AR’s and at least 1 UMP and on occasions, a .308 “sniper” rifle. That’s 24 guys total. An area with a million residents. Do that math. We have an old, second hand armored truck (that is sometimes “iffy”. Aren’t we ready for the coming zombie apocalypse?

    As I said earlier, a small town near me is looking to outfit their guys with AR’s after a recent drug related shooting with an AK. The costs are enormous though. Not only just the rifle its self (figure a $1000…multiple that times 400 for a department like mine) and then there are cases, ammom, ammo bags, and then one of the costliest parts…..training. Training is paid out as overtime and its a HUGE expense, not just at start up of the program, but as a continuing, yearly expense. That town has some civic groups that are looking to fund the hardware…but they aren’t sure if they can find the money to pay the training costs.

    There are departments that allow guys to carry the own…privately owned….patrol rifles. I’m trying to get my department to allow it but so far the answer is no (still a training expense issue).

    Someone said some nonsense about 50’s. Now there maybe a team out there somewhere that has a 50 cal sniper rifle. I personally don’t know of any. They don’t have much use in an urban setting. But some department / sheriff may have one squirreled away somewhere.

    31 already pointed out the nonsense about helicopters and other equipment. Huge departments can bare the expense of such things, but not many .

    So no. I don’t care about things critical of the police. I just prefer there to be truth. And this nonsense isn’t truth. Its a stinky pile.

  • t

    Oh, BTW….its not a “flash bang”. Its a light / sound device. And the mini-bang are the best. Lots and lots of fun. Oh and they aren’t in anyway a “grenade”. Thats more Ariel BS.

  • obama

    America is a militarized police state

  • John Q Public

    t, even when you stick facts right in their faces, they still deny, deny, deny. Copblockers are delusional. And what is a “military work uniform?” When I was in, the same uniform we wore in garrison, we wore in the field. It was rare for us to wear a Class A or Class B uniform. We usually wore those on payday. Another fallacy by a delusional copblocker. Just look at the videos made by copblockers. The only person I’ve seen wearing camouflage is CENTURION. The cops ain’t wearing it. Its very rare to see a cop in my area wearing anything but a “shiny badge” and a metal nametag. Not very tactical to say the least. Keep on drinking the Koolaid, copblockers. You guys have shown no proof whatsoever that the USA is a “militarized police state.” Just your delusions.

  • obama

    The proof is well documented on this site. Just look at the story where Pete was aggressively abducted by the authoritarians in another classic example of senseless police-state violence. The scope of the criminal violence of the militarized police-state street gangs is epidemic.

  • John Q Public

    Obama, just keep drinking the koolaid.

  • obama

    John Q you are in denial and living in fantasy land.

  • John Q Public

    Really? the way you write, you’re the one who is in fantasyland. You’re just as delusional as the rest.

  • obama

    This site and PINAC have proven the police state beyond a reasonable doubt. PINAC posts some incident about every other day or so where the cops act to censor/violently attack photo journalists. If you want to ignore the piles of evidence, keep living in your authoritarian dreamworld.

  • t

    JQP: Truth to a Cop Blocker is like sunlight to a vampire. Close enough to Halloween for that one.

  • John Q Public

    Obama, if you believe that I have some swampland in Florida to sell you.

  • Common Sense

    To my knowledge, not police department operates a UH-60. I’d assume its cost prohibitive. I’ve seen PD have .50 cal, but then again, so can the general public.

    Depending on state, and with the proper Class III permit, an everyday citizen can own a fully automatic rifle or belt fed machine gun and a suppressor.

    Simply look at the Knob Creek Shoot. They even operate a mini-gun and fire artillery.

    …again, the argument that the police are ‘militarization’ because they wear BDUs and have M4 style rifles is laughable. The fact that you are scared of a large truck again shows how little you understand.

    “….aggressively abducted by the authoritarians in another classic example of senseless police-state violence. The scope of the criminal violence of the militarized police-state street gangs is epidemic….”

    Your attitude and terminology is why no one listens to you and your movement gets no where.

    Again, what was the vote for the Bearcat?

  • obama

    Attitude? Like saying the truth? Terminology? Like using factually accurate descriptive terms? It is a proven fact that America is a police state. Otherwise, the term has no meaning. If not America, then where is there a police state?

  • t

    @bama: Maybe you weren’t here. But recently we explored the whole “police state” crap and came away with a clear decision that there isn’t any police state. No one could not only not produce any evidence of daily, weekly, monthly or even yearly contact with anyone from the government (other than a school teacher)…..no one could even offer up any anecdotal accounts of any such things.

    You are just another mislead fool who believes everything he is told.

  • obama

    Has there ever been a police state in the whole history of the world? Where? And how was it different from here?

  • Shawn


    T could see a line of tanks shooting people out after cerfew and not see a police state.

    Did police deploy the device, whatever silky name you want to give it, and did it burn a child? The answer is, yes.

  • Shawn


    ” Shawn: No. I don’t immediately disagree with anything
    critical of the police. I am critical of the police and hold
    them to a high standard.”

    High standard my ass. You didn’t even criticize the cops for missing a the nonmoving man, let alone shooting at him in the first place. You made excuses for the cop who shoved a woman, the cop who decked an innocent woman, and good old Harless. And my personal favorite, the newspaper ladies. Did you have anything negative to say about their actions?

    Talk about steaming pile…High standard. What a joke.

  • t

    Shawn: ?

    Where did I defend any of that.?

    The officer shoved the woman and she got injured. Thats what it is. But that all it is.
    What “non moving man”? The cop who decked an innocent woman…. By her own admissions, she wasnt. Your buddy Harless….. A stressed out officer, workin a shitty and dangerous part of town, encounters an idiot with a gun driving around a crack deing thug and picking up drug using hookers. You need to see that one as it is dude. I never saw anyone defend the newspaper thing.

    Dude, the difference here is the emotion. You get instantly consumed by it. You are alone, but it shows in almost everything you write. Look at the shooting of the mental ill guy in Dallas. There is very little know. About a complex situation. You see a grainy video that doesn’t necessarily show any that the goes against what the story says….but the emotion of it ….what you told you are seeing…..is all you understand. My analysis of that video and the story as told here is absolutely right on. Not an emotional response. A real world response. Logic. Thinking.

    Try it guy. Turn down the volume. Don’t read what is written, what they are telling you too see. Do it for yourself. It’s a far different looking world.

  • YankeeFan


    I agree with everything you said to Shawn but here is my POV abut Harless. He was caught 3 times making similar statements and that’s what caused him to get whacked. One time can be explained as a loss of control or temper. Three times is another story and his admission that he has P.T.S.D. and needed help explained a great many things about his temper.

    I am not hung up on Harless like Shawn but with him, it was not one incident, it was three and three is a pattern!

    As to everything else, so much of the commentary on this site is filled with emotion and it makes it hard to have a reasonable discussion.

  • t

    YF: As always, good points. I really couldn’t give a crap about Harless. But the focus on just one part….without seeing the entire situation, is disengenous at best. As formshawn, its just his way. Hung up in the emotion. That’s OK…to a point. Emotion moves mountains, stirs the soul. Its a part of everyday life. Its part of almost every situation. But you start looking back at things…emotions tend to cloud reality.

  • Shawn


    Sorry, even one time makes him suspect. With power comes responsibility, something cops do not take seriously. Remember his response to his stress was to threaten a life. And he didn’t have PTSD until he needed to explain away his actions. Far more likely he was just angry all the time and aggressive as hell.
    Don’t forget also the amount of support he got from his buddies. That was more disgusting than Harless was.

    “Shawn: ?

    Where did I defend any of that.?”

    You do nothing but sugar coat and look for excuses, imagining them out of whole cloth if need be.

    “I never saw anyone defend the newspaper thing. ”
    Their chief did exactly that. And almost no one, including you, were willing to condemn it or call for their punishment for absurd actions.

    What you call emotion, I call a recognition of right and wrong, of understanding unethical behavior that harms others. Our difference is I understand moral behavior, and you haven’t a clue.

    Ya, emotions can cloud reality. But so can that badge of yours. Even another cop a while back told you that.

  • Shawn


    By the way, you think I shouldn’t get angry over the cops shooting at those women? Or than LE never held them to account for it? I understand what you don’t, that if they get away with that, they’ll do it again. And those three people were as innocent as myself or my family. It could easily be anyone I care about. Nor is right and wrong limited to only my people.

  • obama

    Authoritarians start with the conclusion they want and then they look at the facts. When the facts don’t fit the narrative they are trying to push, the facts are denied, or new facts are invented. Rather than looking at the facts, and then forming the opinion on the facts, they form the opinion, and then try to make the facts fit the opinion.

  • Ariel


    Work or working uniforms are used in the USN and USCG (the USN still uses the term, and I believe the USCG does also). If you look at pictures from the early-mid 70s you’ll see uniforms similar to the ones worn by police departments today (the USCG wore “baseball” caps, the USN Dixie cups). You’ll also see a similar uniform worn by USCG today, the USN has switched to a camouflage. It’s been 35 years and I’ve forgotten the official names.

    I was writing about perception, not that it was proof of militarization.


    “light / sound device” aka euphemism for more commonly used flashbang, unless you meant your flashlight has a radio. They are grenades and fall into the “non-lethal” stun grenade. They have been known as stun grenades since their development. I realize neither your profession or likely the manufacturer(s) want to call it a “grenade” given who you use it on, but it is still a grenade. You might tell some of police departments to stop using the term “stun grenade” on their sites, since you know it isn’t a grenade. Your one opinion with 999 other police opinions to go.

  • Alvin

    t as well as all the other badge-sniffers,

    Yeah, we citizens are armed and heavily so in a great many cases. The more we see the police forces hardening up, the more we will continue to add to these arsenals as well as train and become proficient in these weapons systems. To you weed-worshipers, you are correct. The police forces are arming up and they do have better intelligence. Rather than sitting around with a doob hanging in your lips, perhaps you should sacrifice the cost of the drugs and invest into an arsenal of your own. An armed society is a polite society. Pool your talents as is your propensity in socialistic circles, and set up your own intelligence network. The roads in America generally go both ways. Instead of complaining about the erosion of the Constitution, get out and exercise it. I am particularly fond of the 1st, 2nd, 4th, & 5th. Shove your rights as far as legally allowed up the asses of the very arrogant badge-wearers that you despise. Change comes by way of using those rights given to us.

  • Ariel


    What t is doing is ignore and spin. While I agree with t. that this isn’t a police state, how he arrives at it and how he still argues it is just wrong. It’s a qualitative (arbitrary, secretive, backed by the government to promote fear) not quantitative measure, so his “show me an interaction” has no bearing, even less so when he’ll simply deny any one interaction as proof. And each one after the first.

    Police states like Nazi Germany (Gestapo), GDR (Stazi), and USSR (Cheka, NKVD, all permutations) had a functioning internal secret police who acted with the qualities I gave and were sanctioned by the State. We simply don’t have that here.

    Personally, the incidents on PINAC show poor training and lack of knowledge (or willful ignorance, as one example here shows), or corruption by authority. They don’t show a police state, just police who act poorly.

  • t

    Ariel: Not a grenade by the definition in common use. It doesn’t explode. It produces sound and light. Keep trying though.

  • t

    Alvin: As for knowledge of your “rights”. OK big guy. Just make sure you get it right. Remember….yours aren’t any more important than anybody else.

    Psssttt…..BTW……the people are arming themselves against you, not me. I know that hurts your pride….but its still true.

    Police good. Check.

  • Ariel

    “Ariel: Not a grenade by the definition in common use. It doesn’t explode. It produces sound and light. Keep trying though.” So it’s reusable? It’s done with a computer chip? No chemicals used to create stunning light and sound??

    It is a grenade by the definition in common use, as all grenades aren’t lethal. If you were familiar with compressed gas or liquid tanks, you’d realize they can be made so as not to release shrapnel. These non-lethal grenades are designed with cut-outs to avoid the issue of shrapnel while still creating light and a pressure wave that stuns. No they aren’t frag grenades or worse concussive, but they are still grenades. They still use an explosion to create an effect.

    You know, it would take you about 5 seconds to look this up and then a few minutes of reading, including police sites and military sites, to know what I already knew.

  • Ariel

    And just to help you on your way to understanding explosions, t., airbags work by an explosion (sodium azide to N2) through electrical ignition. It is an explosion (rapid release of energy by chemical reaction) but controlled by having a path for the resulting expansion of the newly formed gas.

    If you think stun grenades aren’t explosive, hold one tightly and set it off. Really, it should be safe…

  • Ariel


    PS. those light/sound devices I call stun grenades. Really, hold it tight, preferably against your adam’s apple, and set it off. It’s not an explosive device so it will be completely safe…

  • t

    Says the chemical salesman who thinks he is saving the world 1 spelling test at a time.

    Do you know anything about “flash bangs”? Really. I would say no. I on the other hand am an instructor. They don’t blow up. They aren’t grenades. They do get very hot. That’s how the FBI guy got hurt. He was burnt, not “blown up”.

    Why don’t you go to whatever local PD you have and volunteer to be a role player. IF you pass a background (iffy for you I’d bet) maybe you can be in a room when one goes off. You’ll see an extremely bright flash, hear a very loud bang, and feel a pressure wave. No flying shrapnal. No heat. The next thing you’ll be aware of is the floor hitting you in the face as the operator takes you down. Its great fun.

    I really do so enjoy our chats. I snicker to myself as I watch you plod along thinking you have a clue. You just divert away from the topic at hand as you can’t argue on any real’points.

    But keep swinig guy. Its fun to watch.

  • John Q Public
  • Shawn


    T thinks that by belittling people, that makes him smart. As is usually the case, he uses such tactics to cover his lies.

    As you can see, t is happy bending the truth into a pretzel. By the way t, I’ve read articles were a person DID take shrapnel from your kiddie toy. It is unlikely, but not impossible.
    It is like tasers. There is a big difference between totally safe, and just a limited risk. Tasers can cause harm, both by simply falling wrong and by the effects of the current on a body. People don’t fall like they do in the movies.
    With your kiddie toy, close proximity can still cause harm. No, it isn’t a pineapple grenade. But just because it can turn everyone in the room into hamburger, doesn’t make it harmless.

    If it is so safe t, do as ariel suggests. Set one off in your hand or next to your face. No? Didn’t think you would do so, since you know you are full of shit about the risks of the device.

  • obama

    Haven’t those types of devices(whatever you call em) killed a couple people and started fires?

  • Shawn


    Yup, and burned a small girl over a nonexistent meth lab. Like so many military devices and tactics, cops try to use them and then ignore that there are limitations. Limitations that are acceptable in a military operation, but less so in a civilian one.
    For instance, a military operation might use a flash bang to enter a room, so as to preserve any instruments or allow the capture of prisoners. If someone gets injured though, oh well. It is war after all.
    Same with their SEAL raids. A fine tactic in a military situation, but prone to unfortunate and inappropriate consequences in a civilian environment.

  • obama

    “Shawn says:
    October 22, 2013 at 10:50 pm


    Yup, and burned a small girl over a nonexistent meth lab. ”

    Oh my goodness, they threw one of those things into a suspected meth lab of all things? Maybe a suspected lab with flammable chemicals lying around might not be the safest place to throw a grenade in the first place, aside from the issue that there was no meth lab…

  • Ariel


    “I on the other hand am an instructor.” which adds a whole new layer as to how sad this is and sad you are.

    Again hold it to your Adam’s apple and set it off. If you are an instructor on light/sound devices, the shame is that you don’t know how they work. Again, grenades aren’t just “blow up”, or there wouldn’t be a category of non-lethal. I never said they have to “blow-up” to be a grenade, but in your ignorance you keep maintaining that they do. As you do on any subject where you willfully continue your ignorance.

    I’m glad you snicker, it’s what morons do when they don’t understand. Flashbangs, or flashlights with radios, aren’t grenades because you don’t understand what grenades are, if you did, they would be. That you teach a class just shows how ignorant instructors can be. You should refund your wages. Your students should complain about being cheated.

    BTW, I have a BsChE too. You have a what? Just to let you know your what is crap, sound is a pressure wave in a fluid. This “and feel a pressure wave” is ignorance of what sound is. You shouldn’t be teaching. You know too little.

    “Why don’t you go to whatever local PD you have and volunteer to be a role player.” That’s all I’m asking of you, put it up against your Adam’s apple and set it off. Make sure half the ports are against your skin.

    “IF you pass a background (iffy for you I’d bet)”. Passed them in the military for special training on radar at a Navy school, twice. But hey you know so much, so the Navy and the USCG was obviously just so very stupid. I have wracked up an extensive criminal record since with the one speeding ticket in 43 years of driving. Bet you’ve done a lot more criminal acts than I have. Just because you didn’t know they were is no excuse.

    Yeah all t. has to do is set it off against his face, or my preferred area the Adam’s apple to prove his point. He doesn’t know what an explosion is, and that one can be controlled to achieve a result. He doesn’t understand that heat dissipates rapidly if channeled away from the body of the device. He doesn’t understand that the FBI agent was burned by the explosion. He thinks explosions have to go boom. Oh, wait…

  • Ariel


    You have to remember it creates a high candlepower and high decibel, but is not an explosive because well it doesn’t fragment. It also barely creates a pressure wave even at 150+ decibels. An instructor said so.

    Yeah throwing a device that uses a controlled chemical explosion, porting fast hot gases to create a flash and a bang, into a suspected meth lab rates as a moment of real stupidity. Acetone, IIRC common to both ammonia and iodine processes, has a below 0 F flash point and (had to look this up) a lower explosion limit of 2.5% by volume. Yep, a non-grenade light/sound device is a perfect choice, but only if that means a flashlight with built-in radio.

  • Ariel


    Never quote Wikipedia, even if every other site, including military and PDs, say the same thing. It’s quite possible they read the Wiki before you…It certainly isn’t possible that stun grenades are, well, grenades that stun. Grenades must blow up to be grenades. I was told that by an instructor, and instructors are always right, because, well, they are instructors.

    Another 999 cops to go.

  • t

    Shawn: Sharpenal. Maybe. Maybe @certain the engineer failed. Maybe the chemicals @ariel sold were faulty. I never said they come without risk. But neither does life. “Flash bangs” are only used in tactical situations….SWAT /Special Ops teams using them as a life saving device.

    You need to think much BIGGER than you usually do. “Less lethal” devices….pick which ever type you’d like….can still kill people. But people die from all kinds of various reasons. I think it was Arkansas were the guy died in the back of the police car. His contact with the police….any force…was minimal. His running and drug use caused his heart to stop.
    Serious injures can occur. I can properly deploy an expandable baton…aiming at an appropriate target (think large muscle groups of arms and legs). But its a fight. People move. My aim may be be true towards your thigh and you move and I crush your knee. Who’s fault is that? Does that mean I did it wrong? Say yore holding a knife and I have the time to get and deploy a “bean bag” shotgun. It hits you but still causes so much injury that you die. Should I have just shot you with a bullet instead?

    Its always a damned if you do, damned if you don’t. That’s OK though. I accepted that 18 years ago. But I also very clearly understand that situations are fluid. Sometimes I can use distance and barriers….sometimes I can’t. Maybe we can wait….maybe we can’t. Youconsistantly misunderstand, or simply don’t understand the whole “descelate” the situation idea. That’s IF we can. And its very dependant on the situation. Lets look at Davy V’s old stand by about the mentally I’ll subject armed with a shotgun walking down the middle of the street threatening people. No, he hasn’t shot or miles anyone yet. But how long shouldthe police wait? SShould I wait until after he shoots and hurts / kills someone before I act? When I call out to him and he doesn’t respond or comply….should I just hope he doesn’t hurt anyone? For those who aren’t in the arena…for that have never done it….for those to think they know and understand….they don’t.

  • t

    Areil: guy, keep trying. I tey to keep the discussion simple…and still it flies over your head. Sorry your dim.

  • Shawn


    You do realize there is a big difference with injuring an active combatant, and arbitrarily tossing a device known to cause injury in close proximity?

    Again, tactics that are fine for military on a battlefield, aren’t necessarily appropriate in a civilian environment. Especially when threat hasn’t been offered.

    ” “Less lethal” devices….pick which ever type you’d
    like….can still kill people.”
    Which is why they should be limited to active threats only.

  • Shawn


    Even police one cops commented, “Is it really a good idea to throw anything with the word bang into a meth lab?”

    And remember, it was an innocent girl and an innocent family the cops hurt. Not that t gives a shit. He’d burn a girl like that and repeat the same tactic the next day. T sees the consequences of police actions as “Oh well,” and equates it with a man holding a shot gun.

  • obama

    And then there is also the issue that those types of meth labs wouldn’t exist without drug prohibition. Drug prohibition doesn’t work and causes the drug problem to be worse than it otherwise would be.

  • Shawn

    Sorry, I don’t get on the pro drug wagon. Recreational drugs are good for one thing, destroying lives. But we don’t have to get stupid in how we police drugs. Sometimes, the cure is worse than the problem.

  • t

    Shawn: “Known to cause injury”. So do ladders. And automobiles. And eating to much Taco Bell (just saw their commercial).

    “Tactics”. Sigh. You say you work security. So you don’t use any tactics to protect whatever property you assigned to protect?

  • Ariel


    So, like the argument with t.? Did he ever really address anything, or did he just use emotion and rhetorical devices to sidestep?

    Or for that matter throwing them in without knowing what or who is there to receive. They burn people, they start furniture and decorations on fire, they can cause permanent deafness, but they do have a purpose and a use. It’s the indiscriminate use based on “non-lethal” and “it isn’t an explosive” that’s the source. I guess that’s why they threw one in a meth lab. What harm could it do?

    I have to agree the tactic of throwing a stun grenade into a meth lab ranks up there with parking on a train track. Only a matter of time…

    It’s good that at least a few cops recognize the stupidity of it.

  • Ariel

    Sorry, I moved a sentence without correcting what had succeeded it, thus “or for that matter”.

  • Ariel

    ““Tactics”. Sigh. You say you work security. So you don’t use any tactics to protect whatever property you assigned to protect?”

    And there we have the problem, all tactics are equal because they are all tactics. It isn’t whether people use tactics, because people do use tactics in all aspects of life, it’s whether the tactics are good or bad.

    Throwing a stun grenade into a meth lab is not a good tactic. But boys do have their toys.

  • t

    Ariel: Wow. You are really becoming “the king the idiots”. Let’s explore why:

    What, do tell, did I “sidestep”? Shawns and yours “non-arguemnt” the a “flash bang” might hurt someone? So do ladders. And automobiles. And too much taco bell. And chemical spills. Next.

    “Throwing a stun grenade into a meth lab”. A quote for the ages. (BTW, did you sell them those “meth” producing chemicals? Ha ha ). More idiocy. You really demonstrate a restricted knowledge or understanding if the real world. Maybe its all the scholarly reading and “studies” examinations you do. personally, I think its really that you, like Shane and so many others, think the real’policework is like TV. Its not.

    Somgo on now

  • Ariel

    ““Throwing a stun grenade into a meth lab”. A quote for the ages.” Yep, and first written by a cop over at Police.one. 997 to go.

    “(BTW, did you sell them those “meth” producing chemicals? Ha ha ).” and you said you worked narcotics? Yet don’t know that chemical distributors selling I2 (meth makers switched to HI after the DEA caught on to I2) and NH3 in the 90s could have a working relationship with the DEA to keep these chemicals out of the hands of idiots in residential neighborhoods, or idiots that build small labs in large car trunks or vans? That staff could be trained to immediately recognize such a call (I2 was easy, HI silly, NH3 more difficult) and turn the calls over to a salesman or manager who could ask the right questions to help the DEA? Or better getting the idiots to come down and pick up the chemical in person with a spiel about the requirements for transporting and can you do that? Yes? Great, only there to help a new account.

    BTW, behavioral science is used across a number of fields. Technique emphasis is tailored to the requirements of the job which is why I never got a false confession but did get some lying.

    But you knew all that didn’t you? Me, I got it from scholarly works. I also got from scholarly works that chemical salesmen might have good friends in remediation who would call them to let them know that the first mobile meth lab had been found in their area the same night it was found, and that it was NH3 based rather than I2.

    I am so very glad for you that you are the font of all knowledge of reality without ever using a scholarly work. I do, however, like Southland.

  • Ariel

    “What, do tell, did I “sidestep”? Shawns and yours “non-arguemnt” the a “flash bang” might hurt someone? So do ladders. And automobiles. And too much taco bell. And chemical spills. Next.” The next would be better followed by an ellipse than a period. Spend your whole next comment on that.

    While I can’t always name the logical fallacy, I do have an innate sense of them because they always leave me troubled. Now I’d likely give your comment “false equivalence”, but comparing Taco Bell to throwing a stun grenade into a meth lab (I notice you aren’t arguing the point of it isn’t a grenade or flashbang now, the British military will so thank you), likely stretches the bounds of false equivalence beyond breaking. So your argument is likely an even worse logical fallacy.

    People use logical fallacies to sidestep an argument. They think it works, the rest of us just shake our heads and wait for something meaningful.

    Here’s the google: “logical fallacies”. It will not only help you in “the art or process of correct reasoning” but even in your Weltanschauung. The latter being more important, but oh so dependent on the former.

    BTW, have you found the word yet for “the art or process of correct reasoning”?

  • Ariel


    Hot gases are hot gases. Magnesium is magnesium. If you spent more time listening and hearing, and less time with accusing others of being an idiot, you’d be less an idiot fighting to prove you’re not.

    So, you’ve acknowleged stun grenades are grenades, but can’t yet wrap your head around the meaning. The energy has to go somewhere, and it’s very hot (rapid chemical reactions are) so as to create a bang and a flash (magnesium does that), but that the heat is dispersed (bang/flash) so the original device only gets “hot” rather than burning, glowing hot. A perfect device of “light/sound” would never rise above it’s initial temperature, all the energy going to light ans sound, but no device is perfect so it gets hot. All I write here is physical reality, the kind you can’t dismiss by profession because neither physics nor chemistry lends itself to that artificial distinction. Both are uncaring bitches about your professional needs. (Sorry for the anthropomorphizing of your profession; damn, I meant physics and chemistry.)

    I am however impressed that in some way, one not fathomable, you still think throwing a stun grenade into a meth lab is okay. Hot gases, low flashpoints, low explosion limits; yep a stun grenade is a great choice. Like a lighted match.