Hoboken SWAT Team-Hooters Scandal

[GoNRA 12]

These swat guys are nuts. How dare they party w/hot hooters girls!!

 

 

 

[tony357 386]

those are some cool pic's.. it is ashame it is not 20 years ago they would be good to go..dumb move.

[Scottcba1 8]

aahhh man what happen to the pics??

 

-Scott

[matty 810]

What I wanna know is, who made a big deal out of it? What's the problem?

[tinyboy 1]

it is just amazing how so many people get their nuts twisted over a non issue

 

WOW MEN WERE HAVING A GOOD TIME WITH WOMEN! THE SHAME, THE SHAME!

[tony357 386]

hey tiny, you know someones pissed because they were not invited and it pisses off other women also...

[uppercuts 0]

You just got to be a bit smarter than this. Guy has poor judgement in my opinion. Not because he's with the girls and the weapons but because he actually photographed it. MUDD

[Maksim 1,504]

:hope:

 

LOl. that is funny though. But seriously, you cant be dumb enough to be handing over assult rifles to people who have probly never them before, AND be drinking AND be dumb enough to be caught on camera. :naughty:

 

I wonder how this would go down if this was not hooters but a :orcs-gayflag: bar.

 

In any case... :text-goodpost:

[SpecialK 193]

wow, how could they be so stupid to hang out with those soulless shells of human beings? Didn't they know that strippers, hookers and hooters girls aren't people too?

[Guest]

no problem except our n.j. + fed tax money paid for it -

[tbtrout 141]

I believe this happened after Katrina on their way back to Hoboken. They were dumb for taking pictures. I did not watch this video, but the pictures I saw last year were just stupid. Giving the girls MP's and AR's while posing on the vehicles. They are representing the PD regardless of where they are, especially when using their weopons and vehicles.

 

Also I believe there was someone in the PD that had it out for the Team or thr LT in charge. I do not remember the whole thing.

 

Just one more reason when you do things, do not take pictures, they will come back to haunt you.

[Lublin 3]

"AUTOMATIC"

 

:roll:

[coldsolderjoint 84]

So because nobody said it yet:

 

Who wants to go to hooters!?

[rscalzo 3]

That was like what, four or five years ago?

 

no problem except our n.j. + fed tax money paid for it

Check your facts. The town didn't pay for the trip. They paid their own way except for the gas.

 

Also I believe there was someone in the PD that had it out for the Team or thr LT in charge

 

One of the people pictures later gave out the video when he was being disciplined on a mater, then turned around and charged the town with Harassment.

 

Angelo is a bit odd but there was a lot more to the story than ever came out. A politician who expressed outrage turned out to be on the trip as was the Chief.

 

In the end, the town got bad press and nothing happened. The charges of racism where found baseless and dropped. I would have thought they should have used better judgment but it's long over.

 

Just one more reason when you do things, do not take pictures, they will come back to haunt you.

Absolutely.

[KpdPipes 388]

I believe this happened after Katrina on their way back to Hoboken. They were dumb for taking pictures. I did not watch this video, but the pictures I saw last year were just stupid. Giving the girls MP's and AR's while posing on the vehicles. They are representing the PD regardless of where they are, especially when using their weopons and vehicles.

 

Also I believe there was someone in the PD that had it out for the Team or thr LT in charge. I do not remember the whole thing.

 

Just one more reason when you do things, do not take pictures, they will come back to haunt you.

 

Ok now that the Statute of limitations is over......

 

#1. They were on the 2nd deployment to New Orleans.

#2 They were ALL wearing Uniforms and in a Departmentally-marked Vehicle when the pictures were taken.

#3 The Lt in Charge of the unit had a severe problem with arrogance on his part..and went out of his way to piss off everyone around him, leaving his Chief to pick up the pieces.

#4 Politics rules in the end. What the guys did was in NO WAY Unlawful or Really Improper except for the uniforms part. They were OFF DUTY on their night off up in baton Rouge...however they did make some huge lapses of judgement. The worst was being in uniform in the first place. Funny thing is that the GUNS were the issue in hoboken and the Nj papers..even though every firearm displayed was perfectly legal for anyone to possess in La, even though they were not NJ-ban compliant, being departmental weapons.

#5 MY group went to the SAME Hooters, the difference was nobody wore a uniform, and marked units were parked AWAY from the restaurant.

 

This all came about because of a lawsuit against Angelo Andriani (Lt in charge of SWAT) that was going nowhere..He KNEW about the lawsuit, and still engaged in these activities while the people who were suing him were on the trip thinking he was untouchable. Unfortunately for him the CHIEF was also featured in a bunch of pictures..cavorting with a lady from down there whom he wasnt married to. The scandal resulted in the dissolution of the entire Swat team, and the forced retirements of the Chief and the Lt in charge. Hoboken SWAT had a bad reputation as it was because of they way they did things, and Angelo's methods. this was only a matter of time coming. to ME, he was always a Nice guy..but then again i was from a different Department, and Not a SWAT guy, although i was on a county-level response team and not in any way in competition with his boys. His fate was sealed the day he got into a VERY public E-Mail pissing match with the Chief Det of the Prosecutor's office and made allegations that Federal funds were being misspent. The resulting investigation (insisted upon by the people accused) caused 3 guys from NJSP counter-terrorism to be transferred out of their spots because of the nature of the allegations, and resulted in 2 of them missing promotions, nevermind putting a Crimp on our C-T/UASI operations for over a year because of the nonsense. Especially since everyone knew the accusations were baseless. Rich, did you ever see any of the Emails from THAT little debacle???

[bbk 188]

That is a shame that one guy trying to 'measure himself' F'ed up the mission. And I'm going to agree with TBT here... whether a person is in uniform or out of uniform, they no longer represent themselves, but the organization they are a part of. The day they put themselves ahead of the organization and/or mission in any aspect is the day they should be shown the door.

 

There's a reason why they took our beer rations from us :doh:

[SpecialK 193]

Jersey cops swear an oath and I have check with many departments that it includes swearing to uphold and protect the Constitution of the U.S. by enforcing these unconstitutional gun laws they are proving they can't even be held to a simple oath, so I honestly don't care if they have pictures of them in uniform getting BJ's they already lost my respect by taking a Job over a Duty.

[KpdPipes 388]

Jersey cops swear an oath and I have check with many departments that it includes swearing to uphold and protect the Constitution of the U.S. by enforcing these unconstitutional gun laws they are proving they can't even be held to a simple oath, so I honestly don't care if they have pictures of them in uniform getting BJ's they already lost my respect by taking a Job over a Duty.

 

 

Ok, lets go through this again... The United States Constitution is a check on the power of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. It does NOT APPLY as written to state Laws. The Constitution is ONLY applicable to sub-federal governmental bodies when it has been "incorporated" under the 14th ammendment by a SCOTUS decision. The NJ STATE Constitution has NO RKBA Protections in it, NEVER has, since 1776, and can regulate or even outright BAN whatever it wants until that Incorporation happens. You can Say "It isnt Fair" and kick your heels all you want but the Law is the Law, the US constitution is what it is, and the State Constitution is what IT is. Maybe if you'd take some time to READ the documents you cherry-pick your quoted from you might learn something, instead of parroting lines.

[bbk 188]

Hehe, I agree. Taking things out of context at times can totally twist the message. But Special K does have a point. Many of the public servants out there have chosen a job over a duty. I'm not calling anybody out, or blaming the society as a whole. I also don't want to totally repeat myself from previous posts... I just think that when it comes to public servants, there is no grey area to their responsibility. There is the principle, and the execution of the tasks to achieve/maintain/reinforce that principle.

[KpdPipes 388]

Hehe, I agree. Taking things out of context at times can totally twist the message. But Special K does have a point. Many of the public servants out there have chosen a job over a duty. I'm not calling anybody out, or blaming the society as a whole. I also don't want to totally repeat myself from previous posts... I just think that when it comes to public servants, there is no grey area to their responsibility. There is the principle, and the execution of the tasks to achieve/maintain/reinforce that principle.

 

 

No, he DOESNT have a point. our DUTY is to enforce the Laws the Legislature puts in place. It's not necessary for us to agree or like those laws, but we cant pick and choose. While we are given some SMALL measure of "Discretion" when it comes to small stuff, we dont have that ability when it coms to Crimes, rather than offenses. Simple fact, until the Chicago case is heard in front of SCOTUS, NJ's gun laws, screwed up and repressive as they are are the Law of the land..Dont like it, then Move out, pure and simple, or work to replace the legislature that makes those laws. .. Good luck with that because as ive said before WE ARE THE MINORITY here..and the sheep will sign away your rights without a thought to get themselves ahead.

[bbk 188]

I cannot disagree with the responsibilities in accordance to what is laid out (in terms of enforcing the law that is written in by the terrible NJ legislation). But to me, that is a part of the "job." Duty is not complying to the SOP or completing paperwork or any of that... duty is a way of life. One's duty encompasses choosing the right over the wrong, and not just enforcing it-- but living it.

Following orders is simply following orders, whether or not a person agrees with the orders. Duty is what drives people to wake up every morning, and decide to take the 'high road.' Duty is what ultimately makes heroes out of normal people.

And that goes back to the original comment. If someone is willing to put themselves before their duty, then I don't think they should be in that type of position. Of course there are people like that, and of course it will continue to happen. To me, that is the problem that will ultimately be corrosive to this country. People are willing to do what must be done to get by, and not do what has to be done to secure the foundation. Sure, it sounds dramatic the way I put it, but is it so far from the truth? People continually see issues, and instead of fixing the problem-- they slap a big band-aid over the issue. One day, it'll all unravel, and who will be there to help with the chaos, or put it all back together? This is the reason why I just do not trust police officers or the system. And as I've said before, I am sure the majority of public servants are good people with good intentions that do maintain the standard. But in such a system, if there is one weak spot-- it'll all cave in when push comes to shove. Why? Because it seems that momentary breaks of accountability really throw a wrench into the machine.

 

And maybe I just think this way because I have that military mindset. I mean, just imagine if the branches of service were unionized... what would get done? I can live with the fact that when I was in the Army, I had no rights, and regardless of my orders, my entire life was "needs of the Army." Sure, I could have a family, own a house, and spend years honing a specific military skill... but the moment the Army needed me to do differently, it would happen with no questions asked. And honestly, when the time came when the Army was just a job and I was not motivated by my duty was the time I made the decision to depart. Why? Because I was failing the oath I made; I was failing the standard set by my country, the Army, my unit, and my peers; and my eventual complacency would jeopardize the mission, and probably get someone hurt or worse.

 

I am sure things are vastly different between that world, and the civilian world... but it should not make the difference when it comes to the expectations of public servants because the possible end-results, though varying in degrees, will be virtually the same.

[SpecialK 193]

I can concede to Kdp that that is the way that it is working right now, but that does not mean that is the way it is supposed to work!

 

If you didn't pledge to uphold the Constitution of the U.S. then I have no point, if you did I sure as hell do.

 

I will continue to kick and scream as a true patriot should until things wok properly.

 

BTW just cause I feel this way doesn't mean I can't be friendly with police officers. One of my best friends(a brother really) here in Colorado is a cop and he has even said to me that if it makes his job safer he would be fine taking away peoples rights a little(which I am very strongly against if you couldn't tell). Just cause I have strong views doesn't mean I won't smile at you and buy you a pint :mrgreen: We are all in this mess together.

[GoNRA 12]

well i'd hate to be the one to enforce a gun ban if it were to ever pass which would be slim as hell, the NRA and hundreds of other groups have to much power and money to let a gun ban happen anywhere. I would have to believe that the bill of rights applies to the people all across the land, otherwise who would it apply to? just federal employee's? The U.S. Constitution was not signed until these were included to protect the people of the United States, hence the word United. I believe the supreme court will solve this issue anyway, but if you think about it, this should not be an issue in the first place.

 

Speaking of enforcing laws, there is alot of illegal immigrants running around

 

just playing...

[SpecialK 193]

:shock: I have my greencard!!! I swear!

[KpdPipes 388]

I can concede to Kdp that that is the way that it is working right now, but that does not mean that is the way it is supposed to work!

 

If you didn't pledge to uphold the Constitution of the U.S. then I have no point, if you did I sure as hell do.

 

I will continue to kick and scream as a true patriot should until things wok properly.

 

BTW just cause I feel this way doesn't mean I can't be friendly with police officers. One of my best friends(a brother really) here in Colorado is a cop and he has even said to me that if it makes his job safer he would be fine taking away peoples rights a little(which I am very strongly against if you couldn't tell). Just cause I have strong views doesn't mean I won't smile at you and buy you a pint :mrgreen: We are all in this mess together.

 

it's easy to point to the US constitution and say "Shall not be Infringed" the PROBLEM is you have to look BEYOND that...read the federalist papers, Adams, Jefferson, Madiosn, and the rest of the Founding Fathers. Hell, Franklin OPPOSED the Constitution as written becaus he still felt it gave too much power to the fed. the states were Supposed to be very independant of each other, up to and including making their own laws. I;ve posted on this a lot but i've done a LOT of research on this, and until Heller, and the Subsequent Chicago case that has stemmed from it, ANY state-level gun law, or even total ban is NOT Unconstitutional because the 2nd Ammendment has not been incorporated under the 14th Ammendment. As long as the Federal Government doesnt pass a ban on firearms, then the limit detailed in the constitution is fulfilled. At this point in time, the feds stepping in and ordering NJ to loosen up its gun laws (Yeah, i know ) WOULD in fact be a violation of the constitution without a Scotus Decision that applies the 2A to the individual states. The key to rmember is that the Constitution doesnt GRANT any rights, it protects those rights given by one's creator from intrusion on the part of the FEDERAL Government. the main problem we have is that the founders of THIS STATE neglected to include the RKBA in the state's constitution.

[KpdPipes 388]

well i'd hate to be the one to enforce a gun ban if it were to ever pass which would be slim as hell, the NRA and hundreds of other groups have to much power and money to let a gun ban happen anywhere. I would have to believe that the bill of rights applies to the people all across the land, otherwise who would it apply to? just federal employee's? The U.S. Constitution was not signed until these were included to protect the people of the United States, hence the word United. I believe the supreme court will solve this issue anyway, but if you think about it, this should not be an issue in the first place.

 

Speaking of enforcing laws, there is alot of illegal immigrants running around

 

just playing...

 

 

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/