SWAT teams claim private company status

Well didn't you know SWAT Teams are private corporations and are exempt from FOIA request's?
lol

Ben Swann has a good article about what's going on in MA - this doesn't even pass the laugh test but that is what these guys are claiming - Boston Bombing comes to mind.

Prior to the ACLU report on the increasing militarization of police, Massachusetts police offices replied to requests for information saying the SWAT teams in the state are private corporations, exempting them from open records laws.

These SWAT teams are supervised by what are called Law Enforcement Councils, or LECs. The LECs are overseen by an executive board of police chiefs from various local police and sheriff’s departments and funded by the various law enforcement offices in the surrounding area. Sometimes, the offices which fund these LECs are headed by the same chiefs who sit on the board.

Funding for an LEC is collected from the departments which make up the LEC, in the form of an annual membership fee. This fee grants the department access to information gathered by other member departments, and also allows the departments the use of a regionalized SWAT team as opposed to a localized team.

SWAT

a reply to: BABYBULL24

It just never fails, they always have something to hide. This would just give them the freedom to abuse yours. The police are getting so bad anymore its hard to say they just pick on African Americans, now they pick on everyone and kill anything or anybody that gets in the way. Even SCOTUS says it legal to film them, but yet they confiscate your camera or beat the crap out of you. It's getting ugly out there.

There is nothing to worry about from these guys, 99 percent of them are good law abiding cops so the chances of running into a bad one is astronomical, right?
Plus they have nothing to hide, so there would never be a reason to FOIA them anyway.
I sleep better at night knowing these good men.. and women are out there protecting and serving the heck outta me.

Door kicking - not sure how that works if they claim they are a private corp.?
Wouldn't that be trespassing?

I mean Flo from Progressive Insurance can't kick your door in if you don't pay your car insurance or Bill Gates can't tear gas your house if you don't pay your Windows Licensing fee...not yet anyway.

But apparently these SWAT guys think they can as a private corp - it's totally screwy.

If they're claiming to be a private corporation, wouldn't that mean they won't receive anymore funding?

All their members/cops are paid by taxpayers so it's total crap...imo

My home state. Some of the worst corruption in the country.

I would think that means, since they are a private company, that would negate their right to:
1. Serve warrants as Police officers, as they are acting as private corp entities.
2. Remove their peace-officer status, to protect and serve, making them blackwater-light.
3. They would be subject to trespassing laws, etc.
4. Makes them perfectly legal targets for shooting when they break down your door in a no-knock raid.
5. Makes them perfectly legal to sue the pants off of them, and anyone tied to them, for any reason, in a civil court, and possibly criminal court if they kill someone in your home
6. (expand the list with your own ideas)

a reply to: BABYBULL24

Omnicorp anyone?

Dead or alive your coming with me......

a reply to: BABYBULL24

Well, what this means then is that they are privately contracted guns for hire - they are, literally, mercenaries and not cops. They are mercenaries that have been utilized by the law enforcement community.

Now the question is.... is it legal for your local police department to hire mercenaries at will to enforce the law? If it's not legal, then everyone involved needs fired, if it IS in fact legal.... then we are all in trouble.

a reply to: Cygnis

It WOULD make it perfectly legal to sue the pants off of them for harm, because they are not cops.

Lol if they're considered a PMC now, when they kick in your door, shoot them for trespassing, breaking & entering, etc etc

Lol if they're considered a PMC now, when they kick in your door, shoot them for trespassing, breaking & entering, etc etc

If they're a private company I guess they don't need any public funds.

a reply to: Cygnis

My husband says that if they are mercs, ie: a private corporation guns for hire, then they are under the laws of the geneva convention - and have to follow the requirements of the geneva convention in what they do.

1) they CAN serve warrants, but they cannot arrest you unless there are citizens arrest laws in that state. Otherwise, all they can do is hold you until police get there (this is US law which varies from state to state). IF they try to arrest you and there are not citizens arrest laws in your state, and take you to the police station, it is considered kidnapping - ie: because they are transporting you somewhere against your will. (unless of course they private police... and there are rules governing that too: limited jurisdiction etc)

2) they have to be nationals in the US to operate here inside the US (national of one of the parties in the conflict)

3) you CAN shoot them for breaking into your home if you can shoot a citizen in the same circumstance.

4) you can sue them for any damage to property or for killing any persons in your home, including your dog.

5) If they are actually mercs, and not police officers, and they are posing as police (ie: wearing vests that say police on them) then they are operating as spies. Under local law they are subject to arrest for impersonating an officer. and are subject to summary execution. (under geneva convention)

And the list goes on... and on... and on....

Definitely something to study up on since our police (some apparently anyway) are using merc's now to beef up the police forces.

Corporations are persons and have the same rights as real people like us, but considering they are "legal fictions" and not corporeal persons like you and I, they are not capable of malice or most other things you and I would be held liable for since we are real persons which makes suing them difficult.

There is something very wrong here and it just keeps getting more wrong all the time.

Corporations were part of the reason for the revolutionary war, a big part of it actually, and were strictly controlled until the 1890's because the founders and a few generations after them remembered what problems they could cause if left to their own devices.

But people just forget over time....

Oh yeah, they're probably non-profit corporations, or some odd variation of one, somebody brought that up earlier....

The thing that bakes my noodle is how a legal fiction/corporate person, can have anything resembling authority or jurisdiction over real live corporeal persons/people, unless of course we have been legally modified somehow or other.

Legally Modified Persons.

LMP's

Lumps.

originally posted by: kx12x
If they're claiming to be a private corporation, wouldn't that mean they won't receive anymore funding?

No because we utilize private corporations for federal and state contracting all the time. They are essentially state/local government contractors in that regard or, as Swann put it, "private security forces" merely hired to fulfill a role of the local police departments.

I think the better question would be is, if they are actually a private corporation, then do they have a right to perform a raid on a home? That is a dangerous question because if the answer is yes, then does that mean that any private corporation has the right to perform a raid on a home? Imagine being behind on your credit card bill and having the BoA SWAT busting in your door. Private corporations should have no role in policing activities.

a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

To say that a corporation is incapable of malice ignores the fact that a corporation is actually comprised of people of which whom are all very corporeal persons. In that light, they are capable of malice depending on the head of the corporation. That is why, in terms of lawsuits and criminal actions, a CEO who engages in fraudulent or criminal behavior ends up in jail and getting sued through their noses. If you look at any annual report/10K, what you will see every single time are the signatures of both the CEO and CFO of a corporation. They are legally bound to sign this document so that, if it is found to be fraudulent, they are assuming responsibility in both criminal and civil courts. Where the limited liability of a corporation exists is in regards to its shareholders. The shareholders can be sued as well but only to the extent of the capital that they hold within the corporation. Ergo, if you are a shareholder of a corporation and hold $10,000 in stock, then you are at risk for being sued up to $10,000 if a lawsuit occurs against the shareholders. *Also, as a shareholder, you would not face jail time for criminal actions of the company in which you hold shares in. That's limited liability.

I had to take business law.

It looks like police are trying to find a loop hole on the Supreme Court ruling, in that police must get warrants for most cellphone searches... It could mean SWAT can continue illegal cell phone spying as a private corporation/contractor.

The government isn’t keeping track of which private contractors see your data and which don’t.