Police SWAT Team Trashes Wrong Apartment

[PLAYER57832]

The saddest part is this is a prospective TEACHER talking!

I think we all wish we could forward the comment to any and all future employers.

the fact that you have never even talked to me face to face yet you call me dumb is sad. you are making prejudgments on me and accusing me that i would be a bad teacher.

I have seen enough of your writing to know you do not have proficient use of the English language. I never criticized your intelligence,only your English competence. That you won't even admit that your skills are poor and now accuse me and others of being biased, however is showing a marked lack of intelligence and plain sense. I defended you previously because you indicated you were not a native English speaker. No problem. However, when you say you are going to be a teacher, then I say you need to achieve English competence if you will teach here. PERIOD.

Not admitting your failings makes you DANGEROUS. And, as a parent who just might find you facing my child .. it is absolutely my business as well as that of any other parent in this country! I was VERY specific in my criticism. I even clarified "if you are going to teach in the US" (though I would add Canada, Australia, the UK, New Zealand, South Africa, etc. ... ie the entire English-speaking world), you need to know English. If I were to teach in Sweden, anything but English language-only classes, then I should speak Swedish.

I really do not appreciate that. this is because i agree with the police. on this matter? well sorry. in this case that you have been making is all dependent on them not having a search warrant and there is no proof for them not having one. i will admit i was wrong saying she was in the house at the time.

I made my disagreements plain. Why would I have to hide behind something else? Again, you are diggind yourself a far, far deeper hole the more you say.

The message is simple: If you wish to teach IN THE UNITED STATES anything except foreign language emersion, or classes specific to foreign language speakers, then LEARN ENGLISH WELL! It is a minimum standard, right along competence in your subject .. period!

If you're dyslexic, tell us. I've got a friend on here who is, and while otherwise a smart guy, does struggle with simple spelling and grammar. If you have no such 'crutch' to hold up as a reason, then we'll continue to rag on you, because you're writing skills are those of an 11 year old, NOT of someone who is going to be a public school teacher.

Per the dislexia -- that is not an excuse. I had 4 middle school teachers who were all dislexic, yet they were all very competent and proficient English communicators. It is possible to teach even without written competency in English, but you do have to first acknowledge your failings and get a great deal of support. History would definitely not be a good choice, becuase it requires so much writing, when taught correctly. (that is, per the standards necessary to succeed in College).

The issue is not intelligence, it is just that we need teachers who can communicate in English well. Colorblind individuals generally cannot be electricians. Someone who cannot communicate well in English cannot teach in a regular classroom without hefy support.

[Kotaro]

I haven't really read this thread, but I watched the videos. I have glanced at a few comments; something about the police "not paying the damages", something about "the girl should have come out and said that he wasn't in there". Those two comments I read are just plainly dumb.

Yes, the police damaged their apartment. Yes, they came on with more force then necessary. That's their job. Should they have gone up and knocked and asked for him? That's how police die on duty. Should they be in trouble for their actions? No. It's their job to protect the peace and keep harmful people away from the public. If the person in that apartment had been the suspect in question and armed, there would be no discussion; the police would be "heros".

The police did their job. They do it all the time, taking down many threats to everyones daily lives. They f*ck up once, do their job the best they can to protect your lives, and people complain.

[Fircoal]

I haven't really read this thread, but I watched the videos. I have glanced at a few comments; something about the police "not paying the damages", something about "the girl should have come out and said that he wasn't in there". Those two comments I read are just plainly dumb.

Yes, the police damaged their apartment. Yes, they came on with more force then necessary. That's their job. Should they have gone up and knocked and asked for him? That's how police die on duty. Should they be in trouble for their actions? No. It's their job to protect the peace and keep harmful people away from the public. If the person in that apartment had been the suspect in question and armed, there would be no discussion; the police would be "heros".

The police did their job. They do it all the time, taking down many threats to everyones daily lives. They f*ck up once, do their job the best they can to protect your lives, and people complain.

Still if they make a mistake that ruins someone's life shouldn't they have to pay for it. Espeically if the town is as rich as they say.

[hecter]

I haven't really read this thread, but I watched the videos. I have glanced at a few comments; something about the police "not paying the damages", something about "the girl should have come out and said that he wasn't in there". Those two comments I read are just plainly dumb.

Yes, the police damaged their apartment. Yes, they came on with more force then necessary. That's their job. Should they have gone up and knocked and asked for him? That's how police die on duty. Should they be in trouble for their actions? No. It's their job to protect the peace and keep harmful people away from the public. If the person in that apartment had been the suspect in question and armed, there would be no discussion; the police would be "heros".

The police did their job. They do it all the time, taking down many threats to everyones daily lives. They f*ck up once, do their job the best they can to protect your lives, and people complain.

I'm not saying that the cops are never allowed to f*ck up, they're human, after all. Everybody makes mistakes. But, at the same time, everybody should own up to their mistakes. The police, in this case, fucked up pretty bad, and so they should take responsibility for their actions and pay for the damage they caused. Literally pay, with money. I'm not saying anybody should be fired simply because of this one incident, but the victim shouldn't have to pay for all the damage that was 'caused through no fault of her own. Could she have handled the situation better? Probably. But she didn't do anything illegal or wrong. I mean, if you went to the dentists office and he said "Oh, those teeth look bad, we'll have to pull them out." and when he does, he says "Ooops, upon further inspection your teeth are fine. My bad!", wouldn't you at least want him to pay for your dentures?

[Woodruff]

I haven't really read this thread, but I watched the videos. I have glanced at a few comments; something about the police "not paying the damages", something about "the girl should have come out and said that he wasn't in there". Those two comments I read are just plainly dumb.
Yes, the police damaged their apartment. Yes, they came on with more force then necessary. That's their job. Should they have gone up and knocked and asked for him? That's how police die on duty. Should they be in trouble for their actions? No. It's their job to protect the peace and keep harmful people away from the public. If the person in that apartment had been the suspect in question and armed, there would be no discussion; the police would be "heros".
The police did their job. They do it all the time, taking down many threats to everyones daily lives. They f*ck up once, do their job the best they can to protect your lives, and people complain.

I don't think anyone's saying they shouldn't be allowed the "grace" of screwing up from time to time. Good Lord, in their job, I am more than happy to give them that benefit of the doubt and even more than that. However, when they DO screw up, they should take responsibility for that screwup, just like anyone else should. They should not have carte blanche as far as not having any responsibility at all...particularly given that their job IS such a position of responsibility and trust.

[PLAYER57832]

I haven't really read this thread, but I watched the videos. I have glanced at a few comments; something about the police "not paying the damages", something about "the girl should have come out and said that he wasn't in there". Those two comments I read are just plainly dumb.
Yes, the police damaged their apartment. Yes, they came on with more force then necessary. That's their job. Should they have gone up and knocked and asked for him? That's how police die on duty. Should they be in trouble for their actions? No. It's their job to protect the peace and keep harmful people away from the public. If the person in that apartment had been the suspect in question and armed, there would be no discussion; the police would be "heros".
The police did their job. They do it all the time, taking down many threats to everyones daily lives. They f*ck up once, do their job the best they can to protect your lives, and people complain.

I don't think anyone's saying they shouldn't be allowed the "grace" of screwing up from time to time. Good Lord, in their job, I am more than happy to give them that benefit of the doubt and even more than that. However, when they DO screw up, they should take responsibility for that screwup, just like anyone else should. They should not have carte blanche as far as not having any responsibility at all...particularly given that their job IS such a position of responsibility and trust.

Exactly, with greater power comes greater responsibility. In this case, SWAT seems to have blown it.

[Kotaro]

No, I do not, nor would ever, expect SWAT to pay. Their job is to go in with overwhelming force, destroy anything they can neutralize, neutralize the rest, find what they're there to find (guns, drugs, people, whatever), and get out. To expect them to consider property is to expect them to not do their job. To ask them to pay for damages, is like asking a Firefighter that, after putting out the fire, they pay for all the things that weren't yet on fire, anbd they got wet and ruined. It's not their problem, they won't pay for it. If they have to expect to start paying for things they destroy, they will be more cautious about damaging property, which will be one more thing they have on their minds when they go into situations, which will distract from what they are trying to do.

Which will end in the loss of more life.

[PLAYER57832]

No, I do not, nor would ever, expect SWAT to pay. Their job is to go in with overwhelming force, destroy anything they can neutralize, neutralize the rest, find what they're there to find (guns, drugs, people, whatever), and get out. To expect them to consider property is to expect them to not do their job. To ask them to pay for damages, is like asking a Firefighter that, after putting out the fire, they pay for all the things that weren't yet on fire, anbd they got wet and ruined. It's not their problem, they won't pay for it. If they have to expect to start paying for things they destroy, they will be more cautious about damaging property, which will be one more thing they have on their minds when they go into situations, which will distract from what they are trying to do.

Which will end in the loss of more life.

Well, I got news for you. If the fire department sprays the wrong house or knocks down walls on the wrong house unnecessarily, they most certainly will pay!

Part of the job is knowing that you put water on fires.

Now, that video is not enough to give us the full story, but it does sound as if the SWAT team was too aggressive ... and, as a result did NOT get their guy. That's the other issue. The guy was there somewhere. Hitting the wrong house helped nothing.

[Woodruff]

If they have to expect to start paying for things they destroy, they will be more cautious about damaging property

Clearly, this particular unit NEEDS to be more cautious about damaging property.

[Timminz]

No, I do not, nor would ever, expect SWAT to pay. Their job is to go in with overwhelming force, destroy anything they can neutralize, neutralize the rest, find what they're there to find (guns, drugs, people, whatever), and get out. To expect them to consider property is to expect them to not do their job. To ask them to pay for damages, is like asking a Firefighter that, after putting out the fire, they pay for all the things that weren't yet on fire, anbd they got wet and ruined. It's not their problem, they won't pay for it. If they have to expect to start paying for things they destroy, they will be more cautious about damaging property, which will be one more thing they have on their minds when they go into situations, which will distract from what they are trying to do.

Which will end in the loss of more life.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that the actual members of the SWAT team should pay for the damages out of their own pockets. Just that it should be paid for. Most likely, out of the departmental budget, or wherever they get the money to operate a SWAT team.

[Woodruff]

No, I do not, nor would ever, expect SWAT to pay. Their job is to go in with overwhelming force, destroy anything they can neutralize, neutralize the rest, find what they're there to find (guns, drugs, people, whatever), and get out. To expect them to consider property is to expect them to not do their job. To ask them to pay for damages, is like asking a Firefighter that, after putting out the fire, they pay for all the things that weren't yet on fire, anbd they got wet and ruined. It's not their problem, they won't pay for it. If they have to expect to start paying for things they destroy, they will be more cautious about damaging property, which will be one more thing they have on their minds when they go into situations, which will distract from what they are trying to do.

Which will end in the loss of more life.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that the actual members of the SWAT team should pay for the damages out of their own pockets. Just that it should be paid for. Most likely, out of the departmental budget, or wherever they get the money to operate a SWAT team.

Yes, absolutely. I was thinking more along the lines of the city pay for it in some way, not the individuals themselves.

[targetman377]

how dumb do you think i am?? really i am a native speaker of English. i am just really bad at English however when i am doing school work or anything over my job i will spend extra time cheeking my English here i will not spend that much time. and until you meet me you should not say i would be a bad teacher.

[hecter]

how dumb do you think i am?? really i am a native speaker of English. i am just really bad at English however when i am doing school work or anything over my job i will spend extra time cheeking my English here i will not spend that much time. and until you meet me you should not say i would be a bad teacher.

But it's apparent that you would be. From what we've seen, you don't have basic English skills. Basic ones. I mean, I don't check my spelling and grammar either, FireFox does the spelling for me (I just right click on the squigly lines), and you can't even do that. It's basic, simple skills that you demonstrate a lack of.

[targetman377]

how dumb do you think i am?? really i am a native speaker of English. i am just really bad at English however when i am doing school work or anything over my job i will spend extra time cheeking my English here i will not spend that much time. and until you meet me you should not say i would be a bad teacher.

But it's apparent that you would be. From what we've seen, you don't have basic English skills. Basic ones. I mean, I don't check my spelling and grammar either, FireFox does the spelling for me (I just right click on the squigly lines), and you can't even do that. It's basic, simple skills that you demonstrate a lack of.

i am sorry before this i never knew how to do that. aright i have already said that. and do you actually think that i would teach kids English no i but when i make slides i will cheek over grammar and spelling like 4 times. cause that is what i struggle with most.

[PLAYER57832]

how dumb do you think i am?? really i am a native speaker of English. i am just really bad at English however when i am doing school work or anything over my job i will spend extra time cheeking my English here i will not spend that much time. and until you meet me you should not say i would be a bad teacher.

But it's apparent that you would be. From what we've seen, you don't have basic English skills. Basic ones. I mean, I don't check my spelling and grammar either, FireFox does the spelling for me (I just right click on the squigly lines), and you can't even do that. It's basic, simple skills that you demonstrate a lack of.

i am sorry before this i never knew how to do that. aright i have already said that. and do you actually think that i would teach kids English no i but when i make slides i will cheek over grammar and spelling like 4 times. cause that is what i struggle with most.

Sorry, I don't care how smart you are, but speaking and communicating well in English are basic requirements before anyone can be a "good teacher".

If indeed you ARE a native English speaker, at least above the age of 12, then you have already had enough time to learn to communicate in English correctly. You might be wonderful at other jobs, include even, perhaps working on curricula, but to teach .. communicating well in English is a requirement.

[Serbia]

And you're right about the dyslexia. I just meant that, if he were dyslexic, that I for one could understand his struggles a little bit more than if he's just lazy/apathetic. Of course being dyslexic isn't a legitimate excuse for not being able to communicate and still being a teacher.

[targetman377]

i can communicate very well when i am speaking. And i do not know that many teachers who teach by writing everything down. i have always listened to my teachers even my high school teachers. but you guys seem be set on your opinion. so have fun

[Serbia]

So you'll be teaching in one of those "paperless/speaking-only" schools then, eh? Ok, you're good I suppose.

[PLAYER57832]

i can communicate very well when i am speaking. And i do not know that many teachers who teach by writing everything down. i have always listened to my teachers even my high school teachers. but you guys seem be set on your opinion. so have fun

The biggest problem is not just that your English skills are poor, it is that you persist in failing to see it as an issue. Also, yes, if you have gone through several years of American schools and still cannot write, it raises definite questions of the general quality of your education.

[Woodruff]

i can communicate very well when i am speaking. And i do not know that many teachers who teach by writing everything down. i have always listened to my teachers even my high school teachers. but you guys seem be set on your opinion. so have fun

As a teacher myself, I really don't believe that targetman is going to have the troubles that many of you believe he will. First of all, most teaching these days is interactive with the students...it's NOT done lecture-style (thank god) because the added activity and "hands on" approach to things does help their learning. Plus, with technology affecting how quickly information can be accessed at home these days, many young people simply don't have the patience to struggle through something that doesn't interest them (an interesting side effect of technology, in my view). Writing skills aren't generally necessary for that.

For those things that WOULD need to be written, he has already explained that he recognizes his weakness in that area (which is, really, the key) and spends extra time ensuring that things are right when he knows they need to be (such as with handouts to students and such).

I've been just as frustrated with his spelling as the rest of you (I do not use a spellchecker myself), but as long as he recognizes his weakness with it AND DOESN'T GET LAZY ABOUT IT, he can still be a high-quality teacher, in my opinion. Will it make things more difficult for him? Absolutely. But if he has the passion for teaching (and he'd better, or he wouldn't last anyway), then he'll be fine.

[PLAYER57832]

I've been just as frustrated with his spelling as the rest of you (I do not use a spellchecker myself), but as long as he recognizes his weakness with it AND DOESN'T GET LAZY ABOUT IT, he can still be a high-quality teacher, in my opinion. Will it make things more difficult for him? Absolutely. But if he has the passion for teaching (and he'd better, or he wouldn't last anyway), then he'll be fine.

I would agree with this, but it did not seem, at first, that he really was willing to admit he had a weakness.

If I was a overly harsh, I apologize, but poor teaching is a rather sore subject for me right now.

[Timminz]

I agree.

Silly SWAT team.

[2dimes]

I'm rethinking this. I would like to see them rappal in through a sky light and smash more computers.

[Serbia]

I'm rethinking this. I would like to see them rappal in through a sky light and smash more computers.

Agreed. I love watching stuff get broke.