The Sack
By Mitch Berg
Joe Doakes from Como Park writes in re an incident over the weekend – a former semi-pro defensive end tackled an armed robber outside a Superamerica in Rogers:
Store customer sees crime about to happen, takes prompt action to stop robbery and capture suspect while police officer stands around watching, gets snotty remark from Chief of Police.
Lucky he didn’t get arrested for interfering with the officer’s observations, I suppose. Still, it’s annoying. The Chief could have said “Hey, thanks for the assist, man, we’ll take it from here; but for all you folks listening, don’t try this at home . . . unless you’re as big as my friend, here [big grin and fake punch in the shoulder].” That would have been classy. Now, the Chief just looks prissy. Jerk.
On the one hand, I’m sure there’s a liability issue involved; some nutcase will no doubt sue a police chief that is seen to encourage “vigilantism”.
On the other? I’m a fire-breathing law-and-order libertarian/conservative -and I’m getting more than a little concerned about the quality of the relationship between the police and the people.
August 20th, 2012 at 1:03 pm
I’m glad to see that the community is going to recognize John. The 17 yr. old punk was lucky to be stopped by John, next time around he may have had a real gun, and the ending might not have been so pleasant, for either innocent or the guilty.
August 20th, 2012 at 1:35 pm
Citizens policing themselves is not good for police chiefs looking for budget increases.
August 20th, 2012 at 2:03 pm
“and capture suspect while police officer stands around watching, gets snotty remark from Chief of Police.
Interesting the spin, which again is not supported by facts, which is put on stories here. When I first saw the title, I thought it might be a post about the STrib cartoonist, Steve Sack, so I wandered over to take a look. I followed the link, and then as I like to do, I looked at other reports from local media, but especially the really small local media. What I was hoping to find was a mention of the amount of cash involved, but another detail which proved interesting was that the bad guy teen was about 5 feet tall and barely 100 lbs., and that the weapon in question was an air soft bb gun.
What is not clear, from any of the reports is how close the two individuals were – the citizen who responded and the police staking out the place. My impression however from the details as they were reported is NOT that the law enforcement officer was sitting around eating doughnuts, just watching, but rather that his stakeout put him further away from the building than the customer was located.
Another detail which I was hoping to find, but haven’t seen yet, is if the stay-at-home hero dad had his kids in the car at the time, and if so, how close they were to all of this, as a practical question.
What I do not see in ANY of the reports is anything which suggests the chief of police was snotty, or the officer who was on stakeout had a bad attitude. What DOES appear to be the case, which makes a lot of sense as a context for their statements is that the OTHER robberies did not involve very small teens with bb guns, but rather significantly more dangerous robbers who were larger and better armed than this one, when they were cautioning other citizens about a decision to intervene. So when, as Fox news quoted:
“Though police don’t encourage chasing an armed suspect — which did turn out to be an air soft BB gun in this case, officers plan to give Daiker an award for his role in the culprit’s capture.
“Anyone who decides to do this is putting their own life in their hands,” said Rogers Police Chief Jeff Beahen. “In this case, it worked out and he’s a hero. Everything went right.”
There is nothing snotty about giving the guy an award, and there is nothing snotty or in the least inappropriate in pointing out that other robbers are most likely NOT going to be the small, frightened, badly armed and inexperienced kid this one was. It is in fact good advice, and perfectly polite and respectful.
You guys must get dizzy with all this fact-averse spinning you like to do to create a warped world view.
This is a change of topic, but I’m putting it here because scrolling down through an old post is less effective. I challenged Joe when he dropped over to Penigma this weekend. I told him I would get more details on all those apparently former felons who voted legally that were the subject of invesgtigations, the ones he wrongly claims should have never voted. All I asked in exchange was that right or wrong, he share it here as well. I started that this morning by contacting Citizens for Election Integrity asking for more specific details about their research. Specifically I asked if those were legal votes that should have been cast or not. I also asked for a list of every county where a vote was investigated, and plan to contact each of those with the same question, which I will report back.
While on the website looking for the contact info a Election Integrity, I also re-read their 2010 report on claims of election fraud, which I would encourage you all to read as well, before believing the bullshit about voter fraud that you do from unreliable sources. http://www.ceimn.org/files/CEIMN%20and%20CCMN%20Response_updated%20June%2016_2010c.pdf
Minnesota Elections – Transparent, Verifiable and Accurate: A Response to the Center for the American Experiment’s Report. which addresses the falacies, flaws, and especially the inaccuracies of different right wing groups regarding election fraud. For example, very few people I’ve met were aware that the Heritage Foundation had issued a report on voter fraud that was flawed; their revised report – no surprise, the revised report was practically a secret – conformed to the report on election fraud issues that Election Integrity had gotten correct the first time.
CAE‘s findings and conclusions differ widely from those publicized in Eyes on the Vote
Count: Non-partisan Observer Reports of Minnesota’s 2008 Post-Election Audit and Recount,2
I found the report interesting reading as it quotes some interesting sources, including the Minnesota Free Market Institute, in an article by Margaret Martin as supporting their conclusions.
I know you all like to think you are fact based when you aren’t, but give it another try anyway. Maybe Joe will get back to you, even if he’s wrong about all those ‘votes that shoudn’t have ever been cast’, because differ or not I think he’s probably a stand up kind of guy.
But sheesh, with the spin you two put on things, Mitch, it’s amazing you and Joe can walk without falling down from dizziness.
I see ol’ Monty Jense lost big last week, btw. Twice. tsk tsk tsk
August 20th, 2012 at 2:42 pm
DG;dr
I will append with this, however:
Get. A. Life.
August 20th, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Re: the cop standing around watching. That’s exactly what he did – stood by watching as the citizen tackled the suspect.
Re: the Chief’s comments. We disagree about the tone of his remarks. You’re entitled to your opinion.
Re: felon voting discussion at Penigma. Not related to this post and it’s impolite to thread jack. I reject your challenge as premature. Post your investigative results on your own blog and we’ll see if they deserve comment.
August 20th, 2012 at 4:09 pm
And a huge AMEN to LearnedFoot’s addendum.
August 20th, 2012 at 4:47 pm
So here’s the local angle –
http://erstarnews.com/2012/08/17/rogers-man-tackles-apprehends-gun-wielding-robber/
I can only assume from her post that Dog Gone has never been a victim of crime. How about taking the view of the clerk? The store where you work has had three seperate armed robberies. A masked gunman walks in and demands money. Most establishments train their employees to give the perp the money and offer no resistance. But even when you are handing over the loot you’re wondering whether or not the robber is going to shoot you anyway or if he has an accomplice who’s going to open up on you due to nervousness or being jacked up on liquor and or other drugs. Speculating on the fact that the robber was Bill Maher sized and was carrying a pellet gun and not a .44 Magnum doesn’t take away from the fear the clerk likely felt regardless of how the perp was apprehended.
August 20th, 2012 at 4:47 pm
To echo Joe, IT’S IMPOLITE TO THREAD JACK! I say this because you constantly do.
I’m firmly convinced that DG rambles on here because noboby reads her dribble anywhere else.
Oh and DG; pfft!!!!!!!!!!
August 20th, 2012 at 4:59 pm
DG,
As Scott and Joe point out, it’s rude to threadjack.
And while it’s not rude, your practice of coming into the comment section, dropping a huge text turd and skittering off behind a cloud of unearned condescension, never to answer for the many, many errors you leave behind, is, well, tiresome.
I’ve more or less given up on trying to respond, partly since there seems to be no point to it; you dump a bunch of crap from the approved lefty sources, and disappear. Any time spent responding is wasted.
And I don’t like wasting time.
So, sad to say, Foot’s probably got the right idea.
August 20th, 2012 at 6:39 pm
Joe wrote: Re: the cop standing around watching. That’s exactly what he did – stood by watching as the citizen tackled the suspect.
That is not what was reported. He was apparently in a vehicle further away than the guy who tackled the kid. Sounds as if he did the right thing per police procedure in calling it in before responding.
Don’t do this because the next guy is probably not going to be 5 foot nothing and 100 lbs, if you are not certain to overpower him is NOT being snotty. Most people won’t have that kind of size difference with a robber. It was sane safe sensible advice.
Short answer back to Joe from Election Integrity – NO, what you claim is NOT what the report said. Preliminary answer, people weren’t prosecuted because of reasons like being incorrectly listed as felons, NOT because CAs gave them a freee pass. I have an appointment to get more details\ed answers from EI in a phone interview, and have been directed to several County attorneys who handled the majority of cases both prosecuted, and those investigated and dismissed, beginning with Mike Freeman, Hennepin County.
Yes, I apologize for jacking the thread. But I imagine you object more because it proves your assumptions are inaccurate and you don’t have any facts on your side. The reality ruins your fantasy.
August 20th, 2012 at 8:00 pm
“Yes, I apologize for jacking the thread. But I imagine you object more because it proves your assumptions are inaccurate and you don’t have any facts on your side. The reality ruins your fantasy.”
*sigh*
I’m going to regret this, but. . .
Doggie? Mitch has routinely and comprehensively dissected your rambling missives almost countless times, and you rarely, if ever, return to even attempt a rebuttal. You want to talk about reality ruining the fantasy? I suspect the thoroughness of Mitch’s repeated drubbings of your logically vacant word dumps would ruin your fantasy, which is why you never return with a riposte. It’s much easier to feel self-righteous and condescending by posting a giant comment turd here and then scampering away so you can feel all superior and haughty.
Also, it’s almost 99 percent likely that you’re out of your troubled mind.
August 21st, 2012 at 6:25 am
DG;dr (x2)
August 21st, 2012 at 9:04 am
” I have an appointment to get more details\ed answers from EI in a phone interview, and have been directed to several County attorneys who handled the majority of cases both prosecuted, and those investigated and dismissed, beginning with Mike Freeman, Hennepin County.”
Here’s a thought: engage in a hobby. Build models, learn a new instrument, take up golf. Something. Anything. See a movie. Read a good book, perhaps. Fiction, please.
This is what well-adjusted individuals do. Well-adjusted individuals do not make calls to bother actual productive members of society to “fact-check” some dashed off post on a blog that gets 2,500 hits a day about a story that, let’s face it, is fairly benign and inconsequential.
Now, don’t get me wrong. There is a place for “fact-checkers” in this society of ours. However, you have repeatedly shown that you lack the objectivity and intellectual firepower to be an effective, credible “fact-checker”. Please stop embarrassing yourself. I cringe a little more each successive time I see one of your little screeds here.
August 21st, 2012 at 9:45 am
Yes Foot, but the comedy value is undeniable.
August 21st, 2012 at 10:15 am
You know, there used to be a comedic aspect to it, but it’s just gotten increasingly creepy, mainly because she really does exist as an actual human being on this planet, who takes herself seriously enough to jump through the ridiculous hoops she puts in front of herself that she thinks are important enough to jump through, but in reality shouldn’t even be hoops, at least to sane people.
Consider the poor people who are unfortunate enough to fall into her sphere of “influence,” who have to pretend to take her seriously, but who probably regard her as an unavoidable nuisance. I’m thinking specifically about a few “county attorneys,” and the completely luckless “Mike Freeman.” These are people who have to pick up a phone and speak with her, and they don’t have the luxury of saying “DG;dr.” They have to ENGAGE with her and actually expend precious life energy dealing with her unhinged inquiries.
When you think of the “Mike Freemans” of DG’s world, the comedic factor tends to diminish.
August 21st, 2012 at 11:13 am
“but especially the really small local media.”
You mean like MNPost and City Pages?
Steve Sack is a bigger idiot than you are, Dog Poop!
August 21st, 2012 at 11:43 am
Ironically, DG’s comment about the policeman being right to wait and call in backup–contradicting her earlier comment about it being “only” a BB gun (you’ll put your eye out!)–makes a wonderful point that we conservatives have been trying to make for years. The police are not required to protect you. If you want to be protected from criminals, you need to either protect yourself or depend on the good will of other robust citizens like our hero here.
And it’s almost a pity that this young punk did not find himself looking down the business end of another customer’s Glock or S&W.
August 21st, 2012 at 12:18 pm
“Have been directed”
Yep, I’ll just bet you “have”.
August 21st, 2012 at 12:32 pm
DG,
I’ll write this, not because I’m under the faintest delusion that you’ll read this much less retain it, but because I think the point should be made.
You would not allow a commenter like you over at Penigma. You would ban you.
Either you would tire of someone else nonresponsivly flooding your blog with screeds laced with condescension (to say nothing of, for the most part, buncombe), or Penigma would reach like a major-league outfielder diving for a pop fly for some obscure offense to take, to justify banning the ocmmenter in a flurry of theatrical ire.
Either way, you would not allow you to comment on your blog.
Please think about it.
August 21st, 2012 at 1:17 pm
“she really does exist as an actual human being on this planet”
I’d like to see a FACT CHECK on that.
August 22nd, 2012 at 3:36 pm
Looks like DG (Penigma’s Chihuahua) has been sending emails to Niall Ferguson over his Newsweek cover article. He writes:
“My critics have three things in common. First, they wholly fail to respond to the central arguments of the piece. Second, they claim to be engaged in “fact checking,” whereas in nearly all cases they are merely offering alternative (often silly or skewed) interpretations of the facts. Third, they adopt a tone of outrage that would be appropriate only if I had argued that, say, women’s bodies can somehow prevent pregnancies in case of “legitimate rape.”
Their approach is highly effective, and I must remember it if I ever decide to organize an intellectual witch hunt. What makes it so irksome is that it simultaneously dodges the central thesis of my piece and at the same time seeks to brand me as a liar. “
I mean there can’t be that many of her out there, can there?