Comm

Canadian Army; 8 years this July. My MOC (Military Occupational Code) Combat Engineer, although I rarely do it anymore since I've transitioned to an instructor role for Cadets (ironic really, If I hadn't had joined the army; I'd be a teacher). I joined the Army because it has always been a childhood dream of mine (joined at 17, eight years later I'm still kicking around); In addition it's also about protecting the innocent and safeguarding the helpless, "These Things We Do That Others May Live" "If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." The Military is a lifestyle, I don't know many who have joined for money because it's a decent wage by most standard; but the amount of work and sacrifices we make, woefully inadequate. You have to want to be there and you have to be willing to do things that most people don't want to do or are afraid to do; you also have to make spilt second decisions that may scar you for years after, most of all you have to be willing to go places that politically don't make sense but it is your job. It's not an easy life style and if you've been in long enough as I have, you'll become jaded and to a degree cynical about the world; you get to see what humans can do to one another. Lastly, god forbid anyone has to experience this; but you may have to say goodbye to friends, people you considered brothers/sisters. The hardest thing I've ever had to do in life and the military was to bury my best friend, you see it on TV or in movies but when your the one saluting the casket.....It's hard. Over the last couple of years (I'm 26), I've been pondering about my decision about Military Service; My friends are all Dentists, Bankers, Work at Google or Microsoft, Accountants etc. I've always wondered "What If". I don't ponder anymore because I realized that I'm one of only a handful of people that can say I've achieved a dream of mine; I've got to do many wonderful things in the Army, travelled, made friends for life (had to bury a few). I couldn't see myself anywhere else, I'm proud, honoured and privleged to have worn that uniform everyday for 8 years, as I'm about to close one chapter of my life (I'm leaving the Army) and hopefully opening another chapter really soon, I have no regrets whatsoever.

OP needs to have at least PR status for Edmonton and Canadian Citizenship anywhere else; with an equivalent to an indictable offence on his record, the OP would have to persaude Immigration that he/she is rehabilitated. An assault charge is a grounds for inadmissibility under Immigration law unless they can prove otherwise. It's not naysaying when you have to face the reality that one day you will have to answer for your mistakes, and explain. Having gone through the interview, I can tell you the interviewers WILL try and find something to use against you; not only that but when you do the pysch interview, the psychologist will use it against you. As others have mentioned (I don't know how recruiting waivers work in the States) but maybe you should look at being in the Military.

It would follow you even up here; the application asks "Have you ever been charged with an offence outside of Canada?". If you have a felony on your record (Which is equivalent to you being charged with an Indictable offence in Canada) the chances of you getting Permanent Residence or Citizenship is slim, let along being hired as a Peace Officer in Canada. Unless you get a Pardon (which I guess would equivalent to a expungement in the states) even then you would still have to explain your record

I like you was told and bullied that I would never be able to join the Army and be a soldier or fighter pilot because I was too fat (I was a fat child), the joke is on them because I joined the Army at 17 and spent the better part of seven years in one of the most psyhically and mentally demanding trade/job in the Canadian Army (Combat Engineer). When I went back for a school reunion, most people didn't recognize me because I had completely changed from being that over-enthuastic 13 year old kid, to a 24 year old Soldier. Having said that, I spent a little bit of time in Military Recruiting and for the most part being a Fighter Pilot in Canada is as competitive (if not more) as the United States. First of all being in the Military is no joke, it is NOT a job it is a life style and for some a career. Secondly, being a fighter pilot is EXTREMELY competitive and exclusive many people try out, few get selected and even fewer earn their wings; They will take into consideration many attributes to include maturity, grades but above all physical and mental fitness. If you DO NOT meet standard you WILL NOT go on any further, they might give you a second try or they might not. As a Cadet Liaison and Instructor part of my job is to recommend people for training courses to include some of the more "prestige" and "specialized" courses, I have failed or not recommended many people simply because they were not mature enough or did not meet standard. I highly suggest you converse with an Air Force recruiter and if possible start training to get a civilian flying licence. Start preparing for it now, volunteer, play sports, do extra homework anything to get that competitive edge. I guarantee you the majority of people who you will be up against WILL have an impressive resume and background. Thirdly always revulate your goals; I finally decided that I couldn't be a pilot because I wasn't very good academically and my eyes were not the greatest. So I decided to do some research and chose a trade/job that I would enjoy. Fourth start growing a thick skin (this is not a criticism or to poke fun of you, but it is reality of what we face in the Armed Forces), Being a former recruit and having been an Instructor I can tell you that some days get REALLY tough. You will be called names, you will be made fun of and you will be singled out, nature of the game; if you can't shrug that off then you're in for a very long ride. Not only will you take crap from fellow Service personnel or instructors, but the public will single you out in Uniform or if you are wearing anything Military related. I've been called everything from baby killer, mama rap***, murderer, I've been told that people in the Armed Forces were just people who had dropped out of HS or is a last resort career; I've also been called ethnic slurs whilst in Uniform. Fifth we taught people to Never Give Up. Basic Training can get real tough and real fast, the option of giving up was always their and the temptation ever so present. If you think you can do it, then go for it; nothing is stopping you. The only way you can be stopped is if the President or God comes down and says "No".

The majority of the countries you listed are part of the Commonwealth (any nation that was once a British colony) as such many countries within the Commonwealth have adopted similar styles of policing, (to include uniforms etc.) in addition to similar styles of Law (known as English Common Law), Government (Parliament), Military ( traditions, uniforms and TO&E) and various other facets of society and government. The reason? it was inherited and has been in the facet within the Commonwealth for hundreds of years, there are slight variations here and there for example in addition to English Common Law here in Canada we also adopted French Civil Law.

Enlisted = Recruit to Regimental Sergeant Major Commissioned = Officer Cadet to General. Generally once you hit the rank of about Major (This being Commonwealth standards; as the OC of a Coy is generally a Major), your now known as a "Staff Officer" and are generally the one planning the operation rather than partaking in it. Think of Officers as a "Manager" and the Enlisted Pers as "workers or employees", whereas the SNCO's are generally "advisors". As for your desire to join Special Forces, It's an incredibly long and arduous journey and one that takes dedication, persistence and a Never Quit attitude. You'll have to be mentally and physically strong (mentally is the biggest part) and it'll take a lot of hard work; although I was never in Special Forces, I've worked amongst them in my time as a Combat Engineer (7 years with the Canadian Army) the majority of them were quite intelligent and were able to think on their feet. Regardless joining the Military itself is a feat, and just going through basic training is a challenge in itself. My advice, if you are joining the Army, learn a trade in the Army; seeing that your from Ireland and you want to join a foreign unit, I would advise you to join the Irish Defence Force, who knows maybe you might not like the military structure or lifestyle (It is a very different culture and to be quite honest, it's not for a lot of people) or maybe you'll make a career within the Irish Defence Force. I know to join any Special Forces unit, you'll need to be able to obtain a High Level security clearance (dual citizenship makes it incredibly harder to get one). Check out the Army Ranger Wing within the Irish Defence Force (It's Irelands Counter-Terrorist Unit/Special Forces). As for your question as to how to develop the "Never Quit" attitude, it's just that. Tell yourself that you’re not going to give up, Tell yourself one more km on a run, or one more chin up, one more push-up; keep pushing yourself to be better than what you think you are. Always strive to improve and never stay complacent.

You realize that there have been multiple controversies surrounding the TSA from letting prohibited items (knives and guns) through, to sleeping on the job to actually failing to detect explosive devices during covert tests run by DHS; and yet people want to arm them? TSA Officers are not sworn law enforcement officers and as such have no powers of arrest, instead of arming them why don't we either increase Airport Police or as another member wrote consolidate Airport Police and Border Protection into one unified organization. Better yet why not just give airport security to the State Police or Federal Protective Service as the Australians and us Canadians have done.

Actually the reason why the MP5 has faded (not replaced) is due to ballistics and bullet penetration and not due to an out-dated design or the inability to accessorize the firearm. Ever since the advent of the use of Carbines in the military, Law enforcement agencies have adopted the carbine due to the fact that it offers everything that a SMG offers (Size, weight, compactness) with the specifications of a rifle (Longer engagement, Power, Ease of transition, ease of training etc.). The MP5 has not been replaced as it is still the favourite in many disciplines and domains. It depends on the city, size of the agency and local politics. In New York you will never see a regular patrol officer with an AR-15, Likewise here in Canada many urban agencies have begun to adopt the Patrol Rifle policy (although my views differ but that's for another discussion). He wasn't asking how much the CIA, NSA, CSE, CSIS, MI6, MI5 gets in terms of funding or what's the latest in stealth technology or the latest in combat survival equipment for X Army or even how First Responders respond to a particular incident. He was asking what types of firearms are used and issued to Law Enforcement which is public domain, do a google search and you'll receive hundreds of thousands of hits regarding Law Enforcement equipment and firearms. Unfortunately I hate to say it, your point is moot, This is not classified information this is information that has been made public by particular agencies through purchasing contracts, recruiting information, officer-involved shooting incidents and court cases.

I agree with you 100% regarding the 99%; unfortunately here in Ontario, Policing and Law Enforcement has become sort of like a private business. It's become a joke when you talk about accountability and internal investigations regarding bad and corrupt cops.

That's the problem, at no point were any officers endanger of being stabbed or attacked. The fact that they didn't try to de-escalate the situation using words (Telling the guy "Drop the Fing knife" isn't de-escalation), is going to be one of the largest issues. William Blair did hire a former judge to conduct an audit in regards to police procedure and protocol, however it was discovered that the judge used to work for a private law firm that has acted on behalf of the Police Service dealing with Civil Lawsuits against the force. In addition the Ombudsman Andre Marin (who audited and released a scathing report on the SIU) will also be conducting an investigation into Use of Force practices in Ontario, already he has received threats from anonymous officers from other regions.

We've had two or three similar incidents in the past two years. I'll agree with you that Toronto cops aren't the best in dealing with these types of situations, some of the guys are very good at what they do but for the other 75% they need a refresher or two on what being a cop means, as you can see in the video 22 cops stood around and did nothing; one can be heard calling for a taser. Sergeant was already on scene with a taser. He's already been charged criminally. Problem is the supervisor wasn't the one who put nine rounds into the kid, having spoken to a couple of friends who are still with Toronto; the supervisor will probably be demoted and face adiminstrative action.

Those two units are OPP; they have unmarked units in various colours and makes.

Not simple, self-explanatory as in there is no need to explain any further due to it being extremely well looked into.

I'm sorry if this is a bit blunt but the reasons posted on this thread are extremely simplistic and overlook some of the deeper reasoning behind the explanation of why people hate cops. There are deep societal, economic, environmental and cultural reasons as to why people have a negative view of policing it's not simply "oh, he was a p***** that's why I hate em". Some explanations are self-explanatory (Race, Age, Gender, Where they live) others like Socio-Economics (Class) and Cultural run much more complex.

Yes the Use of Force in this video was justified as the dog was posing a threat. A Taser or Pepper Spray would be pretty much ineffective against an angry determined dog, especially one that is seen in the video. However there are mistakes seen in the video which ultimately leads to a provocation. The dog was reacting to the fact that its owner was being threatened and as such decided to lunge at the officer's involved. Hind sight is great but simple mistakes and miscalculations lead to something even bigger.

The one good thing about the Aux Program is that you can network amongst the Regular Members and that often helps if you get a reference or recommendation from a Regular Member. In addition you'll be working with the recruiting unit a lot so they know your face and know who you are. Again I don't know how Regular OPP members treat their Aux, but Regular TPS guys kinda treat Auxiliaries as "kids" due in large part to incidents and general view of certain members. Just remember the public can't differentiate an Aux member between a Full time Member. @Deputy2497 Aux members in Canada is equivalent to your Reserve Officer Program; except in our cases, they are unarmed and have limited peace officer status whilst on duty. Training is also very limited. Although they can make an arrest they are unable to charge, ticket or otherwise caution them. They may go out on patrol as long as they are with a full-time Officer, otherwise their duties are also limited and restricted.

Many former Aux members go on to become Full P.C.'s; just don't go into the Aux Program thinking you'll be pulling people over, brandishing a firearm, going out on raids etc. etc. because you do see a lot of Auxiliaries who think they are "actual" cops. It's a good program to learn and to be exposed to the policing world. You do a lot of community events and assist regular members in crowd control at certain events and in Search and Rescue situations. I don't know what the OPP Aux program entails but generally it's the same across the board. Just remember Auxiliary Police here in Canada is extremely different than what it is in England and in the States.

Was working at a local courthouse one winter day and I decided to grab lunch across the street; As I stepped outside (I'm at the front door of the courthouse) there was a guy in front of me asking if I wanted to purchase some meth/heroin/crack (I don't remember what it was), I looked at him and said no, he continued to ask if I wanted to buy some "really good sh**"; I looked at him again and slowly produced my warrant card. He looked at me with this confused, shocked look turned around and was met by a colleague of mine who just so happened to overhear our "conversation". Another day, we had this kid who had just turned 18 the day before walk through our security metal detectors and he set the thing off. We thought, Ok maybe he had some change, a belt, and keys whatever that he forgot to take off. We asked him to empty his pockets and walk through the gates again, same thing he set the thing off, we proceeded (as per policy) to use the hand held wand and again he set the thing off. Now were asking the guy politely to empty whatever he has in his pockets, he starts getting really defensive and starts sweating (At this point were still asking him politely, none of us had raised our voices and we weren't suspecting anything). He starts yelling at us how we can't prove anything, he doesn't have anything for about five minutes, we get irritated and basically told him that whatever he has isn't going to be that bad. Guy pulls out a clear plastic bag with about 10 pounds of weed because he was going to sell it right after he his charges for an earlier theft were to be withdrawn. One of my best friends one February day was writing some guy a ticket. All of a sudden he hears this loud crash, he turns around and sees that someone had just dented a parked vehicle; my buddy goes up to him and asks if he's ok and if he needs an ambulance, guy says no and he's fine. My buddy turns around and proceeds to write his ticket when he hears another crash, he again turns around and the very same guy has just crashed into the parked vehicle behind him; My buddy calmly walks over and asks if the guy has any identification and asks to see his insurance, proof of ownership etc. Buddy comes clean and tells my friend that he had just stolen the vehicle, my friend then proceeds to run his name and the guy has something like 99 Charges for Auto-Theft and five different Bench Warrants.

I did not know that, then yes if that was the case the circumstances and timing of his allegations are questionable. If that was the case then Charlie Beck and the LAPD would not have had to re-open the case (I mean the guy is dead, and the majority of media outlets have in some degree left the story as is). There is more to this story than what the media and LAPD are reporting. However, if the claims are proven false; that doesn't mean the LAPD is off the hook. They and every other organization still has to deal with the "Blue Code of Silence" and "Thin Blue Line".

When did the Chief make those remarks? I assume after he was deemed an enemy of the state? Yet if he was so bad as they claim, why wasn't he fired before? Why wasn't he fired prior to making those claims? Look at Adrian Schoolcraft where the release of his tapes sent him to a mental evaulation for six days. Cpl. Catherine Galliford of the RCMP was discredited by the RCMP and members of her Division, yet she did 16 years as a Mountie and was the face of BC RCMP. Like I said, Read his Manifesto with an open mind. He was attempting to uncover Police Misconduct and how the brass often sweeps it under the rug because they themselves grew up in the "good old days" where cops never snitched on cops for beating the sh** out of some innocent person. No one is supporting the actions that he under took to clear his name. This is what ticks me off that everyone who supports or remotely supports Dorner's manigesto is automatically labelled as some sick scum bag who should rot in hell. NO ONE SUPPORTS THE MURDER OF INNOCENT PEOPLE PERIOD. What they are supporting is the fact that he was attempting to uncover something here. As I mentioned earlier in a previous post all you have to look at and research is the history of police misconduct and how it's investigated then look at the outcomes of such cases. Rampart ring any bells? Danziger Bridge Shooting? Look, label me what you want. I support law enforcement just as much as the next person but when cops decide to turn on the oath they swore to uphold (I'm not talking about trying to get a pedophile, rapist or serial murder off the street) I'm talking about cops who often abuse their powers, who beat innocent people for no reason at all and cops who are fanatics when it comes to the "Thin Blue Line".

It has not been proven that he had bad "police man skills". Have you tried working in a position where your boss hates your guts because you decided to stand up to something? Your reputation and evaulations suffer because you decided you weren't going to keep the status quo. Reputation is a big thing in Law Enforcement and the Military. He didn't do this because people were making fun of him. He did this to uncover something, yet again I am not condoning his actions but if you were to objectively analyze his manifesto and the situation at hand, you'd realize that he actually has a point. You have your opinion, I have mine. I don't know what your background is and I'm not going to assume, but wait until you hit the streets with some cop who just wants to beat the sh** out of people and just because of his/her "reputation" as a fighter your claims are instantly dropped and your reputation is tarnished because you decided to do the right thing. The Police Force/Military can be a VERY cruel "brotherhood" especially if you decide to stand up to speak out against police misconduct. As for your comment regarding affirmative action. How do cops who beat the sh** out of their wives, girl friends or who decide that it's a good idea to take money get on the job? This is a general comment to anyone whose in Law Enforcement/Military or those who are pursuing such a career. I hope to god that you guys don't get sucked in to a situation where someone is enforcing this "Code of Silence" and "Thin Blue Line".

To add; Actually take the time to analyze his manifesto with an Objective perspective, and you'll realize that he does bring up some interesting points. If the claims that he made turn out to be true, then what does that say about a large Police Department such as LA who were hit hard during the Rodney King episode and hit again with the CRASH episode. As for those who are about to ask, what do I know about policing. As I mentioned earlier, I have seven years of Military experience; When I transfered into the Reserves I went to school for Criminology whilst working for the Police Service in my city as a member of Court Services (Detentions), HQ Policy staff, Policy staff regarding youth crime and gangs, Worked on a Anti-Gang/Violence unit in some of the worst hit neighbourhoods and was a member of a team that was under the command of the Community Relations Unit. I have worked with cops with both good and bad, and seen the "Thin Blue Line" that Chris Dorner was attempting to uncover. I still hang out with cops, some of my best friends are cops. I also plan on going back to the Police Force after my contract with the Army expires.

The guy was trying to make something right; he was trying to re instill integrity and honour into a profession that has since been scruntized every day by cops that he was trying to fight against. Am I condoning his actions? no, as I mentioned he could have used other means or avenues to approach this subject directly. The fact that he killed innocent people goes against every moral values that have been taught to those in the military. I understand his mentality but disagree with his tactics. This "Thin Blue Line" is a toxic poison that has infiltrated every level of management within the majority of large metropolitan police departments. Chris Dorner was merely trying to expose this corruption that has turned cops into the very people they were sworn to put behind bars. That's going to happen; your gonna have people say bad things about a guy who just committed a crime. A "friend" of mine was fired and terminated by the Police Force that I had worked with, from guys that I knew in his Division they said great things about him before he was terminated; after he was terminated they reversed what they said and labelled him a "screw up in training" and "failure". Another two of my former co-workers were also terminated by the same Force again people were saying great things about them BEFORE they were terminated, afterwards however they went on to say that they were incompetent, lazy and a complete f*** up. Actually the incident in question had been reported by Dorner before he was terminated, even the guy's father put in a complaint against the Officer in question. That's the thing, a lot of people have a negative image of law enforcement due to the fact that there are officers whom abuse their powers; thinking just because they have a gun, badge and a uniform they are above the law and are god. I've seen this type of attitude and behaviour and quite honest I was disgusted that these people are "Protecting and Serving". Sure many officer's do the job because they want to make a difference but more often than not the one's whom Chris Dorner was talking about in his manifesto are the ones that most people see. The issue of Police brutality and Cops over stepping their boundaries was bound to blow up. Look at it from an OBJECTIVE stand point, you have the MCSO losing their "Federal" status because they were basically harassing every Mexican they could find; You have the Seattle Police Department being investigated by the DOJ for violating CIVIL RIGHTS; You have the Anaheim Police Department being investigated for shooting four people; You have the Toronto Police Service being hammered for its treatment of the mentally ill, pay and abuse; You have the RCMP under the microscope for violating the Charter, Abusing their rights and discrimination within their own ranks, I mean the list goes on. It was bound to happen at some point. So for people supporting Chris Dorner and the points that he brought out in his manifesto, it's not so hard to believe at all. Again I'm not condoning his actions, I don't think anyone in their right mind would support a guy who killed innocent people; they are supporting the points that the manifesto brought out and supporting the fact that the issue of Police Brutality and the "Thin Blue Line" has been put on the fore front. Charlie Beck even stated that the LAPD was re-opening the claims that he made. For those who say "Oh well, the Thin Blue Line is something that cops can fall back on because of what they see and deal with" Yes, it was created for the mere fact of talking with, counseling and the peer-support of other cops NOT using it to perjure yourself and lying about beating the sh** out of a completely innocent person. As for the actions of the Police in the stand-off, I don't think they actually had a choice. I mean it was either risk losing 20 guys in an assault or burn the place down; given they could have negotiated with him but he made it pretty clear that he was going to die in a hail of bullets.

So in essence he was your run of the mill, Intel guy with the minimum level of small unit tactics. I'm just reading up on his profile via the release of his Naval Records (Again take it with a grain of salt); being assigned to a Force Protection unit. Agreed, although I understand where he is coming from and can even barely sympathize with his cause; he could of used other avenues to address this matter. Instead he decided to use the tools and training that he received for evil. Again I can only speak in regards to my experiences up here. If his unit was on the ball regarding battle standards then he would have had to work with the guys in his unit, reading up on his Naval Records and seeing that he was assigned to a Force Protection unit the puzzle pieces fall into place. It is a scary thought simply because the majority of law enforcement officers have no prior military experience and can not "counter" tactics that are taught in the Armed Forces. I.E. Andres Ray (Ceres, CA).

But was he attached to a RIVRON Unit? I mean if he did deploy in country (I don't know how it is in the US), I'm assuming he would have gotten the basic Pre-Deployment training package. If he was attached to a RIVRON Unit then they would have had to train him up to their unit standards (to include small unit tactics etc.). We had clerks and medics attached to our unit. They shot the bare minimum but we made sure that they were trained to our standards when it came to small unit tactics and ambush drills. Given I did seven years in the Canadian Army, I did work with American Marines, Sailors and the Army and it seemed like they knew what they were doing.