Glock Talk banner

AZ_Wildcat

5K views 80 replies 34 participants last post by  steveksux 
#1 ·
You’ve made several posts regarding your involvement in LE on these boards in the past few weeks.
I happened to stumble upon these posts along with other members.

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/i-just-dont-understand-cat-people.1678653/page-4

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/what-do-you-think-about-open-carry.1651945/page-41


You’re welcome to PM proof of your claims to RussP.

I will reiterate we should have a verification system in place for those who claim to be LE, especially on a firearms board.
 
#11 ·
I know it has been discussed in this forum a time or two but it would be nice to have a way to identify those who have been vetted.

There are a few forums that do so that are strictly police orientated but GT is so broad that I spend most of my time here. It would be nice to know at a glance who the impostors are.

For example, SOCNET.com adds "Been There, Done That" under the username to identify those who have been vetted as a member of a military special forces unit (SEAL, Force Recon, 18 series guy, etc...)
 
#12 ·
I know it has been discussed in this forum a time or two but it would be nice to have a way to identify those who have been vetted.

There are a few forums that do so that are strictly police orientated but GT is so broad that I spend most of my time here. It would be nice to know at a glance who the impostors are.

For example, SOCNET.com adds "Been There, Done That" under the username to identify those who have been vetted as a member of a military special forces unit (SEAL, Force Recon, 18 series guy, etc...)
There's a couple places I visit more LE-centric that required verification/proof via agency credentials in order to access and post to the community. Seemed to work out well.

ETA - Below is the process used for verification on one of the communities:

You will need to send an image (all personal information redacted, including photo, with job title left visible) of your agency-issued credentials with a printed or handwritten note containing your username and date included somewhere in the picture.
 
#16 ·
As I don't have an opportunity to read all posts or threads here in the forum can someone please quote some of the ones by him that had started to raise some eyebrows and some stuff that people have found which were the wtf moment?

I see some mention as well of Facebook. As I am not a face paint user can someone please post some evidence from there as well?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#17 ·
On another forum he claimed to be retired DEA. He and his buddies call themselves snowmen for partaking in the evidence amoung beautiful Latinas in central America. His buddies still use this name and have logos on their vehicles.
All fabricated. You can find their names on the Amazon book links.

He also swindled money from people by promising to make holsters. Then he claims disabled and his mobility scooter is dead. A good person buys him several hundred in batteries. He is 400lbs but not disabled. God I wish public assistance records were public.

He's outed by us and runs to other forums. Yet he will always be found. He'll continue until he does something stupid in real life.
 
#19 ·
Wow.
 
#18 ·
I don’t know what that is... I mean, I know what a snowman is (like a man made from snow), but I don’t know what “the snowmen” are.

Is that like some secret league of something, or some dudes who wear top hats and have carrot noses?
LOL.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#20 ·
#26 ·
This may neither be here nor there, but I thought it strange when he made a comment about an agency mandating which weapon can be carried off duty, implying his agency(s) didn't do that. I personally don't know of any agency in my area allowing officer's personal choice in off duty weapon choice, and mine even mandated I carried as well as other off duty mandates.

I'm sure there are other agencies out there more liberal in their policy, but that's the only thing in AW's responses that made my ears perk up.
 
#32 ·
As I've posted in previous threads, my Agency had a pretty liberal Duty Weapon Policy and NO Off-duty Policy until they made the Glock 22/23 Transition in 92' & 93'. When I Retired in 01' they had recently started Mandatory BUG Quals if you wanted to carry a BUG. Our LEOSA Qual is basically the BUG Qual, 10 rounds total and is NOT scored. Four rounds with Both Hands, Three Strong and Three Weak along with a Load and Unload, basically to confirm the Old Farts haven't forgot and are still safe :waving:
 
  • Like
Reactions: slamdunc
#39 · (Edited)
For over 20 years I've been on a LEO only net operated by a east coast college. Before you would be granted access you had to send them a copy of your ID and a supervisors name and contact number. Even with that there was at least 1 guy who managed to get on the list who was a wannabee cop. He faked his creds from MI, got caught up there by the locals, moved to FL, and bluffed his way around a lot of dept in FL. He's been charged but IIRC charges were eventually dropped for him to just go away. He's written articles for several LE related magazines. Total phony. Even that list with it's background checks couldn't keep out the nutjobs.
There's another list, O*****.com that's full of phony LEOs. A few of them had been jail guards but they won't admit it and try to pass themselves off as a street cop. Others are college kids taking LE courses. They get found out before too long.
 
#40 ·
As far the verification thing goes... Our police association (it’s like a union for you east coast guys) used to have a message board on the association website. You could only be on the board if you were a member, so there was no doubt that everyone was verified.

There were also some ***hole rats who started throwing people under the bus with our administration over stuff they posted. I got jammed up and the only thing that kept me out of IA was that there wasn’t a social media policy back then.

It didn’t take long for the association to shut down the message board, and the department came up with a social media policy.

I personally don’t care about verification, because I don’t trust any of you guys anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#43 ·
As far the verification thing goes... Our police association (it’s like a union for you east coast guys) used to have a message board on the association website. You could only be on the board if you were a member, so there was no doubt that everyone was verified.

There were also some ***hole rats who started throwing people under the bus with our administration over stuff they posted. I got jammed up and the only thing that kept me out of IA was that there wasn’t a social media policy back then.

It didn’t take long for the association to shut down the message board, and the department came up with a social media policy.

I personally don’t care about verification, because I don’t trust any of you guys anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's not really about trusting anyone in this forum, in my eyes. It's about persons coming to this forum and speaking with authority on matters they know nothing about which has the potential to diminish LE as a whole, especially people who are likely to take those statements at face value and believe them to be from a credible source. It may seem obvious to most, but plenty of people believe everything they read, just take a look at the media.
 
#44 ·
We've had lots of posers here in the 14 almost 15 years I've been around. They always slip up. They cannot stand up against the best investigative team on the internet, the Cops of CTGT.

Oh, yeah, and my many years of getting people to listen to my questions (I already knew the answers) then telling me what they shouldn't about things they thought I knew nothing about. Wrong...

One thing I need to ask. Follow the rules. Do not piss off those two moderators, RussP and Sam Spade. They can be real a-holes...
 
#49 ·
Let me argue the flip side: I assume that if you are going to vet cops for the purpose of preventing whackers, you're going to identify the cops somehow so that Joe Poster knows to whom he's speaking. If you don't, what's the point?

This leads to an easily identifiable subset of the board. So, when Dippy from DU comes along, or when some mouth-breather already lurking gets bored, he can easily identify a bunch of people that are living with policies seriously restricting their ability to speak freely. From there, it doesn't take a lot of work to narrow down an agency or three where the hated poster earns his living. A shotgunning of complaints follow. Perhaps some of you have heard the term "A-rocking".

I'd suggest that this get handled on a case by case basis. If someone is playing the fool, bringing it to admin's attention mean that Russ and I are automatically notified. From there, what's best in the particular circumstances can be done. That said, if there's a clear desire from members for a vetting process, I'll support it however I can.
 
#53 ·
This leads to an easily identifiable subset of the board. So, when Dippy from DU comes along, or when some mouth-breather already lurking gets bored, he can easily identify a bunch of people that are living with policies seriously restricting their ability to speak freely. From there, it doesn't take a lot of work to narrow down an agency or three where the hated poster earns his living. A shotgunning of complaints follow. Perhaps some of you have heard the term "A-rocking".
Good point.

I’m not a real cop. I just play one on TV.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#57 ·
  • Like
Reactions: Bruce M and pgg00
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top