[00:00] Speaker 1: (instrumental music plays) Welcome to Leo Roundtable at leoroundtable.com. My name is Chip The Block and I'm your host, and we're a group of law enforcement professionals that talk about today's news and issues, but we do it from a law enforcement perspective. And you recognize him, Jeff Weninger, retired LAPD commander, retired as a lieutenant from the, uh, Los Angeles County Police Department, and, uh, Los, I said Los Angeles, uh, uh, City Police Department. I said county, didn't I? That, that's, I'm got your, I got your friend Ralph on the show and he's already messed me up 'cause he worked with the, uh, sheriff's office, so. But thanks for being on the show, Jeff, appreciate it. A shout out to our sponsors, you know, our title sponsor is gaulus at gaulus.com, complianttechnologies.com, our satellite sponsor.

[00:49] Speaker 1: We have gunlearn.com, mymedicare.life, safeguardrecruiting.com, our streaming sponsor, and thanks to them we're streaming to over a million followers right now on social media during the live show. And finally, twobells.com, they built their new online store at leoroundtable.com. Go to our website, check out the online store. You can buy cool gear like the shirt that I'm wearing, and the prices are rock bottom. I spend what you guys spend. We don't make a dime off of anything in the store; we're just trying to get our gear out there. So please check that out. I'll also give a shout-out to Brian Burns for the Tampa Free Press at tampafp.com. Thanks for carrying our content, Brian. Ray Dietrich from herelawman.com and Travis Sheets with lawofficer.com, thanks to all those entities for helping make this show happen. Now, what in the world are we talking about today?

[01:25] Speaker 1: You know, Real, uh, Real Clear Politics, uh, and, you know, one of our, uh, secret service guys turned me onto this, uh, publication. They're talking about the presidential job approval ratings, you guys might be surprised. And there's a lot of things in the news right now, uh, none, uh, y- not least of which is of course, you know, what's going on in the Middle East and with Israel and that war coming to a cease, and of course the Nobel Priest, Peace Prize went to somebody else. (laughs) But, uh, you know, it's almost, it's almost like I wouldn't even want it now. I just, you know, it's almost like an insult, you know, w, getting the Nobel Peace Price, uh, in my book. So anyhow, we'll be going over the, uh, presidential job approval ratings and, and how does that tie into law enforcement? I will tell you when we get there, but it, it's an, uh, I think it's an interesting tie-in.

[02:06] Speaker 1: Also, feds warn that up to 20 years in prison after Portland, uh, anarchist group, they call for mass laser attacks on aircraft. I cannot, I, I so hope that if anybody does this crap, they get, that they, they get the full 20, uh, years in jail for, on the federal law, uh, crime, anyhow. Then we've got the, um, Second Amendment Foundation and the DOJ, they actually team up together to shut down a Louisiana court that wants the membership roster for a gun group, uh, it's crazy, I can't believe, but yeah, you would never see the Biden DOJ do this, but Trump DOJ has jumped on the bandwagon. Then we got Portland officer puts a suspect in a, don't say it, a neck hold? You, are you serious? And after a, a nearly seven-minute struggle over an officer's gun, um, interesting component, male and female officers involved in this. Um, I would say that we exi- we- we s- observe different performance levels. We will be talking about that.

[03:00] Speaker 1: Uh, Louisiana State Police release body cam from a deadly traffic stop that killed a guy named Brandon Nicholas, and we've also got Toronto police lead, or they, uh, a police officer pleads guilty to assault and careless use of a firearm in a shooting that left a man injured. So wow, this guy pled. And then body cam shows, eh, Indianapolis police officer shooting a suspect who killed two people over a $40 dispute, and I think this next one, uh, I'm gonna hold, I'm gonna go ahead and say what it is, but I think I'm gonna hold onto it because we've got a- Attorney Ken Apianco on tomorrow's show, and I think that he's gonna eat this up. Washington State permanently blocked from criminalizing priest confidentiality of confession. When we covered that, when they were gonna make it a crime if a priest didn't come forward.

[03:41] Speaker 1: Someone's in the confessional, and I'm not Catholic, but if, if, if someone is in the confessional doing their thing, um, and the priest doesn't come forward with the information, they had this, these serious criminal charge there, uh, in Washington State for these guys, and so they're, the law's staying, they're just not going to, they're gonna be blocking, you know, prosecuting people for it. So i- it's kind of a, it's kind of, it's kind of, well, look, we're talking about Portland and, and Washington State, so when I say it's kind of messed up, I, I, I think that that's all I have to do is give the location, you guys will get it from there. So if you're ready, Jeff, you ready to cover the first, um, main story or two? All right, so the first one, uh, Real Clear Poli, uh, Polling, actually. Real Clear, I thought it was politics, but R- realclearpolling.com.

[04:23] Speaker 1: So these are the, uh, they, they call it today in history through October the 13th job approval ratings, so, uh, we're gonna start off, there's three approval ratings for three different presidents. And i- it is, uh, 45.3 is the top of the game, and then the other one just under that's 44.4, and then we've got one, uh, that is, uh, it 39.5 sounds low when you consider the other ones being in the mid-40s, right? Trump is at the top, and, and 2025 at end, ended October the 13th, through October the 13th, he's at 45.3, uh, job approval rating, uh, followed by Obama in 2013, uh, the year I retired, 44.4. So that's almost one point of, it's almost a full point below. And, uh, then we've got 39.5 and that is Bush back in 2005.

[05:13] Speaker 1: So whenever I, you know, (laughs) like whenever I get in, in debates with people, which happens more and more since this show, um, it, I always find that, you look at, a lot of this, it, it, it's this in- infatuation with Trump and, and, and the, uh, and the hate that goes along with that. I can't say that I understand it, but what you have to understand no matter what side of the fence you're on is that now we can safely say that more than half of this country sides with President Trump. They elected him, he got the popular vote. Don't forget that. 'Cause Obama got it, uh, two terms in a row, right? So that's why, in my opinion, these arguments about systemic racism, they don't hold water, 'cause we elected not just a Black president twice and he got the popular vote, uh, which means he got the majority, right? But he also was a Black Muslim president. So all these presiden- th- these prejudices that people like to throw out there, I think that it negates it.

[06:08] Speaker 1: And when you're considering Donald Trump, whether you like what he's doing or not-... over a half of the people in this country wanted him in, in the office that he's currently holding because he would, said he was going to do exactly what he's doing right now. So, the people are in the minority that are not approval. So we do have the, the... look, I, I've, I've started to see a trend for some of the vocality of this, uh, to be limited now. We've even got Hillary, uh, Clinton and some other people praising him for his effort to stop the war in the Middle East. And, uh, so we've, we're seeing a tide here, a pendulum swing. I don't think it's going to be a full pendulum swing. I don't think that we'll get Rosie O'Donnell on the bandwagon, uh, on praising Trump. But, uh, but that said, people that have formerly been critical and, and just huge critics are now, are now on it.

[06:53] Speaker 1: So whether you like him or not, you have to remember that the majority of the, th- of, of the country wanted him in there. So, when you're talking about groups like Antifa and some other stories we have coming down the pike, um, these people, when Trump's going after them and, and, and making these guys terrorist groups, or, or listed these guys as terrorist groups, and we're talking about the drugs and the fentanyl coming over here and he's going after China, um, and people in Venezuela, you gotta understand that this is what the country, this is why we elected him, and we got tired of the open borders and stuff, and, and being lied to. So, um, so I think it makes for a good conversation. Jeff, what do you think?

[07:28] Speaker 2: Well, actually, I, I, I opened up the, uh, the graph that you, that you emailed me. And I, I just find it interesting that, uh, whether you're a Trump, Obama or a Bush, that from the time that they take office, that there's historically always a decline in their popularity. Um, I'd also be curious to kind of see what, uh, what Clintons looked like, um-

[07:52] Speaker 1: (laughs)

[07:52] Speaker 2: ... and also what Bidens looked like. It'd be, it'd just be kind of interesting to compare some, but I suspect it's the same. Um, you know, that being said, I mean, it's, it's really, you know, um, I think, uh, Trump won 49.8% of the popular vote, which was, um, I think, uh, Harris got, like, 48.3. So you're talking about a, about a point and a half difference, which is really only 2,248,000 votes. Now, it was, it was a landslide in the, um, electoral college. But, um, you know, really, what we are seeing in this country is, you know, a pretty divided down the middle, um, attitude, and it's kind of interesting. I listened to, uh, Joe Rogan, and he was all over Trump for the immigration stuff.

[08:40] Speaker 2: Um, not getting rid-

[08:41] Speaker 1: Yeah.

[08:41] Speaker 2: ... of the violent criminals, but he was, he was, uh, critical of how he's going after people that have been here for a decade or two, and, um, may be here illegally, but, you know, haven't violated any laws and own homes and are paying their taxes. And I think, I think Trump needs to be careful. Um, all conservatives, I think, should be concerned, because he needs to be kind of, uh, reasonable in his approach, and he may lose some of these people that are in the middle, um, that could be harmful in the, in the midterms as well as, um, in 2028. But, uh, you know, those are just some interesting things. Uh, it was interesting what Joe Rogan had to say. I, um ...

[09:22] Speaker 1: Ar- are you, are you referring mostly to the immigration issue as far as, um, I know that they're, I know they're, at least they're saying they're targeting the people that are the, the criminal offenders. I know that during, while they're going out there doing that, these other people come in the crosshairs. It's almost, you know, you can't avoid coming across other people that are going to be illegals that maybe are not the rapists and the murderers and stuff, but, you know, what do you, what do you do with them?

[09:45] Speaker 1: Um-

[09:45] Speaker 2: Right.

[09:45] Speaker 1: And they, and they did commit crimes by coming over here illegally, but it's just they've been here for a while, so.

[09:50] Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, it's, and I guess Jo- Joe's point, I guess, was that he's, he's like, you know, you, you want to be measured in, in everything you do, 'cause he, I, I believe he thinks it's important that we don't lose people, um, you know, in, in his, in his methods in which he's trying to accomplish his goals.

[10:05] Speaker 1: Agree. All right, good commentary and good start. Commercial break will be right back. My family only cares about one thing, that I come home safe.

[10:17] Speaker 3: At Gulls, every order begins with a promise. Made with purpose. Stitched for support. Back with pride. Answered by dedicated hands. Delivering the standard you have sworn to uphold. We serve more than the mission. We serve the person. Each piece is engineered to help get our first responders through the shift and back home safely.

[11:09] Speaker 1: Welcome back. Leo Roundtable at leoroundtable.com, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip The Block, and I'm your host. We're joined by former LAPD commander, uh, Lieutenant Jeff Weninger, as well author of, if I hadn't mentioned it before, I'll mention it now, On Thin Ice. More information on his new book at onthinicebook.com. We've been talking about, um, pol- presidential polling and, and the favorability and, uh, and, and Jeff actually did some digging on the poll and stuff, and, uh, we were just kind of correlating that to, um, to law enforcement. And even though, yeah, Trump did get the popular vote, Jeff is cr- I have to agree with Jeff. This country has been split pretty much it, it appears down the middle for a while. I, I mean, you know, you're, you- you've got almost as many people on one side of the fence a, a- as on the other.

[11:56] Speaker 1: I think there's some issues that we kind of, you know, that kind of, uh, uh, we, we, we blend in on, but, uh, but there's, there's, there's enough severe ones that we absolutely don't. So.

[12:06] Speaker 2: I, I just think it's important that the, the fringes of each party not control the policies.... you know, I, I think this country is really looking for somebody that's, uh, that's gonna use some logic and some reason and, um, try to bring people together. Because truth be told, we really have more in common than we have as far as differences, and it's about navigating a path forward. And, um, you know, I, I think we can get there. Um, right now there's things that are occurring that make people question that, but, uh, you know, we're, we're, we're Americans and, uh, we're a resilient country and we've come o- overcome a, a lot worse scenarios than what we have now. And there's a lot, there's a lot on our plate as a country, but, um, I think by and large, uh, we're addressing things in an appropriate way.

[12:55] Speaker 2: That doesn't mean that there's not areas that we can improve upon, but, um, you know, that being said, um, you know, it's just, uh, it's important that people are patient and, um, you know, not, uh, not look at things from a self-serving perspective, trying to find things that support their, their narrative that they wanna, that they want to expound, but, uh, actually look at things objectively and see what the data really suggests. And that, that's really what's important.

[13:22] Speaker 1: Agreed. You know, before the show, I was actually watching the news and watching some of the, um, um, the, um, the Israelis who had been released by Hamas, um, coming home and, uh, I'll tell you, how can you not, how can you not watch that and not just like get goosebumps or maybe tear up a little bit just the emotions that these people are showing on TV, and they haven't seen their loved ones in two years. They didn't even know whether ... They didn't even know who was alive and who was dead, they just are watching TVs and videos to see if one of their loved ones is, is, is in the small group of people that's being, uh, released. What do they have like ... Is it, is it 20 people that are alive and then there's, there's quite a, a number of people who are, who are deceased that they're gonna be getting the bodies and stuff?

[14:03] Speaker 1: But man, what a, uh, I mean, you know, j- horrible situation, but th- the people coming home finally and this thing ending, you can only imagine the emotions, the range of emotions these people are going through right now. It's, uh, I mean, it's, uh, wow. H- how can ... I mean, what a ... Uh, uh, like I said, every time I wake up and see the news cycle, there's, there's, there's so much good that's going on, um, in, in, in a world where there's so much bad going on, I guess is where I'm going. So, um, you ready to cover? We got another one here, uh, about the, uh, the, um, Portland and anarchist groups if you can bel- if you can possibly believe there's anarchist groups in Portland, I know that probably shocks you, Jeff, but, uh, the, uh, Tampa Free Press at tampefbee.com and Red Voice Media at rvmnews.com. So the feds are warning up to, uh, up to 20 years in prison a- and that actually, I gotta admit, that kind of sur- surprised me a little bit.

[14:52] Speaker 1: 20 years in prison after Portland anarchist group calls for mass laser attacks on aircraft. Well, I guess, you know, especially i- if it's an organized effort. I mean, I, I tell you, the people that are trying to organ- It's almost like inciting a riot, right? I would be going for the people that are, that are, um, m- maybe r- I hate to say running the website, but the people that are definitely posting stuff like this and getting away with it. Um, the Trump administration has issued a stern warning about the 20 years in federal prison for anyone who shines lasers at aircraft, a threat that comes just a day after an anarchist website encouraged a mass laser attack on law enforcement helicopters this past Saturday. Now, the FBI, um, their office in Portland, um, they used a Twitter post on, or X I should really say, on Thursday.

[15:38] Speaker 1: They detailed, um, the severe penalties that are involved, a clear response to a blog post by a leftist website that urged locals to, quote, "Fill the skies with lasers." Unquote. Aimed at federal helicopters. And according to the FBI, uh, those who engage in this, um, in this activity, they could face charges of aiming a laser pointer at an aircraft which carries up to five years in prison or even destruction of an aircraft or aircraft facilities which can result in a 20 year sentence. Wow. And the blog site, and, you know, I'm not even really gonna mention the blog site name. Uh, it'll be in the article if people wanna look at it that comes out, you know, tomorrow morning at nine o'clock on a Rumble, uh, page. But the, um, the post explicitly states that the goal is to impair pilot's vision and to force the aircraft to land. And of course, that's if they get lucky, if they don't crash.

[16:24] Speaker 1: And they go on to say that if enough lasers are pointed at the aircraft, we think that it will not, they will not be able to safely stay in the air for long enough to continue to pinpoint the source for law enforcement. In other words, they won't get caught. Uh, but it's these guys posting that are saying that, not the people that are trying to get the point of the lasers. The authors added that the large number of participants would make it difficult to focus on a single person. The blog also ordered or offered instructions on how to evade capture, um, be ready to dispose of the laser, wear gloves, clean it with alcohol, don't leave your DNA. Um, if you, uh, if you, if you won't take ... Anyhow, it says, "I- i- it won't take many of us to ground the helicopters," is what the post said.

[17:02] Speaker 1: And it just goes on to say that the DHS also noted that this website, whose name I'm not gonna say, it's one of several doxing websites that have previously revealed the names and home addresses of immigration agents in Oregon. So these people are trash from the, from the word go. Uh, Jeff.

[17:20] Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I, I find this rather disturbing. Um, you know, any- anybody that knows anything about aviation to have lasers shined in a, up at a, whether it's a helicopter or a plane or whatever, it can, it can have tragic results. Uh, the reality is that I really hope that we're going above and beyond just sharing what the potential legal ramifications could be. I would hope that we're doing some, using some o- open source intelligence to try to identify specifically who these people are and reaching out. I am certain there's gotta be s- something on the books where posting something like this could be perceived or fit into the criteria and the elements of, uh, you know, conspiracy or what have you, because there is, um ... This, this type of stuff is, is absolutely, um-... um, irresponsible. And, and the reality is, is that, yes, I support a First Amendment right.

[18:22] Speaker 2: In this country, you have the ability to, to share your, your positions on, on controversial issues and, you know, law enforcement, by and large, will help facilitate those First Amendment rights. But it doesn't give you the right to threaten or try to encourage people to do something that could result in someone's death.

[18:41] Speaker 1: Great. All right, commercial break, guys. Stick with us.

[18:44] Speaker 2: We'll be right back.

[18:45] Speaker 1: All right. Introducing Compliant Technologies at complianttechnologies.com. And they're committed to providing non-lethal solutions to help officers gain the upper hand safely and rapidly in a humane, low ethics manner, utilizing their CD3, which stands for Conductive Distraction and De-escalation Technology. Their flagship product, we all know by now, is called the Glove. It's helped officers, I was gonna say tens of thousands of times, but now they're up to over 250,000 deployments with absolutely no injuries and no deaths. I mean, that's a crazy stat. Um, and, and you heard me correctly, no injuries. They've actually achieved non-lethal status in an arena that predominantly can only offer less lethal results. When it comes to weapons retention, transitioning to a sidearm or a conductive energy weapon, the Glove at complianttechnologies.com, they virtually eliminated weapons confusion.

[19:28] Speaker 1: So stay ahead of the game with Compliant Technologies and the revolutionary CD3 that hundreds of agencies have already turned to nationwide. And friends, take it from me, when it comes to safety, this is one of the most common sense, hands-on solutions that's ever come along. So go to the complianttechnologies.com today and tell them that Chip sent you. Again, that is complianttechnologies.com. Welcome back. Leo Roundtable at leoroundtable.com, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip DeBlock, and I'm your host. We're joined by former LAPD commander, Lieutenant Jeff Wininger, author of the new book, On Thin Ice, at onthinicebook.com. We've been talking about lasers, Jeff, and, uh, about this, uh, these, uh, th- these groups in Washington State, the Portland area, that are threatening to take down federal aircraft with these laser point- pointers. Uh, trying to do it with a, a show of force so that there're so many of them that they can't be captured and stuff.

[20:17] Speaker 1: Um, I- I'm, you know, you better believe now, I mean, now we've got the intelligence, right? We know that... we know what they're planning on doing. You got to believe there's guys, you know, infiltrating these groups and just wanna, wanna be there when this... And I, I, man, I, there- there's little doubt in my mind that we're gonna see some, see some bad guys go into jail on this thing. And, and I hope, and I pray, that we don't have any aircraft that goes, go down or that pilots get any permanent damage and vision, vision. Uh, but, um, I know that we're, we're holding, uh, another story with a Louisiana court coming up, but any final words on that, on that last story with the laser pointers?

[20:54] Speaker 2: No. I just hope, uh, people have enough sense to not, uh, engage in that kind of activity.

[20:59] Speaker 1: Yeah.

[21:00] Speaker 2: Be foolish. And if, and if they do, then they have nothing, uh, they can't complain about the consequences that are coming.

[21:07] Speaker 1: Well, this next story, I, you know, Dan O'Kelly is on the stream right now. I tell you, I would so love to have Dan, um, on the show talking about this. Hint, hint. Uh, and, and Dan, if you, if you text me, I will send you the link to the show. But, or you can, or you can type in, um, and most people can see what you're, what you're typing I think, but, uh, at tampafp.com. So we got the Second Amendment Foundation and the DOJ, we're talking about the Trump DOJ, they actually team up together, and this is a gun issue. Um, uh, they're, they sh- they're shutting down a Louisiana court order for a gun group's membership roster. Now, I was in the gun unit in Tampa and there are federal protections from keeping the government from getting a hold of the list of gun owners. Um, this just goes beyond everything. I can't say I'm surprised because we've been worried about the Biden DO- Biden DOJ and other, um, liberal groups that have sought to do stuff like this.

[22:00] Speaker 1: Um, there's even been stuff in California that's been very scary. But the, um, Second Amendment Foundation, um, in a coordinated move with the Department of Justice, believe it or not, they filed a motion to amend a Louisiana district court's judgment that mandated that the organization hand over its membership list as part of a ruling in the case of Reese versus ATF, if you can believe that. So, um, it doesn't happen a lot, but yeah, the DOJ is working hand-in-hand right now. So you gotta, you gotta love that part of it. And, um, I'm just, uh, and what I'm doing, I'm just making sure that it's not Dan O'Kelly, you know, paging me right now.

[22:37] Speaker 1: So, (laughs) so, and it goes on to say, "The underlying lawsuit, it challenges a federal law prohibiting licensed firearm dealers from selling or transferring handguns, uh, to adults under the age of 21." Now earlier in the week, the court entered a judgment that contained an unexpected directive and it said, quote, "Within 21 days of issuance of this judgment, those plaintiffs shall provide to defendants a verified list of their members as of November the 6th, 2020." The order directly targeted the, uh, the SAF, uh, which of course is the Second Amendment Foundation and one of the organizational plaintiffs in the case. It, it, it attacked both.

[23:16] Speaker 1: Now the SAF executive director, Adam Kraut, stated that the organization's immediate response was, uh, "Once we read the judge's order, we took quick and decisive action to ensure that our member data would not be supplied to anyone, much less the government." He stressed that the organization's firm stance asserting that they have never and will never provide the government a list of their members and that they will, um, be, um, they won't be strong-armed into turning over private data of those who support, um, the Second Amendment Foundation. And the partnership with the DOJ in filing this particular motion to amend, um, it's a significant development according to the story, which I agree with, as the DOJ is typically the defendant representing the, uh, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms and Explosives ATF, and, uh, crowd expressed gratitude that the DOJ agreed with their position and they actually joined the motion. So, um, uh, another really warm feel-good story.

[24:10] Speaker 1: What do you think about this one, Jeff?

[24:13] Speaker 2: Uh, I find it a little peculiar. I'd be interested in what the actual court's rationale-... for making that requirement to be. That's ... It, it's kinda ... B- Because it seems like they're, you know, there w- there was more than one entity involved in the lawsuit, and to single out this one, SAF, um, that in and of itself doesn't sound appropriate. Um, I, I can understand the, uh, the desire to, um, remain, you know, confidential in regards to your membership and, and all of that. But, um, um, a- absent having some idea what the rationale from it would be for having that requirement, it, it's hard to comment on it. But I, I'd be hard-pressed to find something that I think is legitimate, (laughs) I guess, is what I'm trying to say. I, I, I can't wrap my head around it, so ...

[25:06] Speaker 1: Yeah. I, I agree. And the data they were looking for, they wanted the member list from November the 6th of 2020. So that's a dated, that's a date ... And look, there's still a huge issue with it, 'cause those guys have still got guns, right? But, um, but I, I, I know there's a purpose in the judge's mind on, on, on thinking. He just wasn't thinking, you know. Um, I don't, I don't care what the rationale was. That is prohibited, and I'm so glad that we've got the current DOJ in place, and that, um, and that Pam Bondi's not gonna let that happen. So, um, anyhow. Wow. Um, if you're ready, we've got some stories with video components, and, uh, we may spend a little time talking about some of these. We've got roughly five minutes before we take our next commercial break. We're gonna need it. Let me ju- let me just say this real quick, that you, you are on the show today ... Obviously, you know that, 'cause you're here, Jeff.

[25:49] Speaker 1: But, uh, every time you're on the show, we do a, (laughs) uh, Two Bells giveaway. So are we still good for one today?

[25:54] Speaker 2: Absolutely. You bet.

[25:55] Speaker 1: All right. So people that are watching the stream, uh, if you are able to type in the number two and the letter B for Bell, and give us your email address, you'll be up to win a, a $20 gift card code for use at our online store at leoroundtable.com. So Two Bells, uh, built the new online store for us. We got cool gear, and, uh, th- the first $20 is on them. So if you want to win that $20 gift card code, type in the number two, the letter B for Bell. We need your email address so that I can email you the code at the end of the show. And, uh, it's just a, uh, great opportunity. If you have not won that contest in the last 90 days. So that's the, uh, that's key. So I'll be watching for the entrance on that. And, uh, it's a, uh, it's a great opportunity, guys. So, moving along, and we got some stories with video components. And I always say, um, you know, we don't really show live videos on a live show. There's just too many things that can go wrong.

[26:41] Speaker 1: And look, a lot of our listeners are radio and podcast anyhow without the video component. So if you really want to see a video that we happen to talk about, and, and we will describe in great detail, so you may not feel the need to. But if you need to see one, all you have to do is watch our show the very next day, and that is at nine o'clock in the morning. Producer Will will release a copy of the live show from the day before, but he'll embed every video that we talk about as we talk about it. Pictures of the good guys and bad guys will pop up as well. It's a great way to watch a show. So even though our live show is during the lunch hour, Monday through Friday, from 12 to one o'clock Eastern time, Tuesday through Saturday at nine o'clock in the morning, the, uh, produced version with all these videos and pictures, that gets released, um, on our Rumble channel called Leo Round Table. So in this story, from ... And I got this story from rumble.com, and it's called ...

[27:26] Speaker 1: The channel is This is Butter, our favorite law enforcement video channel. We have a Portland officer puts a suspect in a neck hold after nearly a seven-minute struggle over an officer's gun. But there's two cops.

[27:35] Speaker 4: Then the suspect, 43-year-old Beau Davis, emerged from the bathroom holding the red metal pole. Officer Randall signaled to Officer Babason to help him take the man into custody. The suspect resisted the officers.

[27:50] Speaker 2: For what?

[27:51] Speaker 3: Deputy, please.

[27:51] Speaker 2: For what? I understand, I'm not resi-

[27:52] Speaker 3: Keep your hands behind your back.

[27:53] Speaker 2: I am. But what for?

[27:54] Speaker 3: Relax.

[27:54] Speaker 2: Why are you dude ... I didn't do nothing.

[27:56] Speaker 3: Relax. Yes, you did

[27:57] Speaker 2: I didn't do nothing.

[27:58] Speaker 3: Put your hands behind your back.

[27:58] Speaker 2: No, I didn't. I'm not.

[27:59] Speaker 3: Hey.

[28:00] Speaker 2: I didn't do nothing. You have to tell me why. You have to tell me why.

[28:02] Speaker 3: Okay, relax.

[28:03] Speaker 2: Why? I didn't take ... Give me a fucking ... Get the fuck off me.

[28:10] Speaker 3: Let go of my gun.

[28:10] Speaker 2: Get them off of me.

[28:11] Speaker 3: Let go of my gun.

[28:12] Speaker 4: After about 25 seconds, Davis can be seen grabbing Officer Randall's holstered sidearm. During the struggle, Officer Randall's body-worn camera was knocked off his uniform and landed on the ground face up.

[28:25] Speaker 2: You're touching me. Touching. Stop touching. Why are you touching me?

[28:31] Speaker 3: Are you going to fight him?

[28:32] Speaker 4: I'm asking.

[28:32] Speaker 3: Fight him, fight him.

[28:34] Speaker 4: The struggle went to the ground. Davis got on top of Officer Randall who was on his back. Officer Babason ordered him to get off the officer, and delivered focused strikes to the suspect's back.

[28:44] Speaker 3: Stop it. Yeah.

[28:47] Speaker 2: Let go.

[28:47] Speaker 3: Get off.

[28:48] Speaker 2: You're pushing me in the fucking area.

[28:49] Speaker 3: Get off.

[28:49] Speaker 2: Let go of me.

[28:52] Speaker 3: Get off of him.

[28:53] Speaker 2: Get off me. You're pushing me.

[28:54] Speaker 3: Calm.

[28:54] Speaker 2: Officer Randall told Officer Babason to use her taser, and she attempted to deploy it. However, it did not appear to be effective.

[29:03] Speaker 3: Don't fight him.

[29:03] Speaker 2: No. I'm not doing it.

[29:05] Speaker 3: You're getting tased. Stop, stop. You're getting tased.

[29:06] Speaker 2: I'm not doing it.

[29:07] Speaker 3: You're getting a tase.

[29:08] Speaker 2: I'm not.

[29:09] Speaker 3: Don't. Stop, you're getting a tase. Taser, get the tase.

[29:11] Speaker 2: I'm not doing nothing. I'm not doing nothing, man.

[29:16] Speaker 4: Davis's hands then went to Officer Randall's throat. Officer Babason struck Davis in the back of the head with a plastic handle of the taser.

[29:25] Speaker 2: Hey, hey, hey. Get off my fucking dick.

[29:27] Speaker 4: That was also ineffective, and Davis again dove toward Officer Randall's pistol.

[29:33] Speaker 3: Bitch.

[29:33] Speaker 2: Ah.

[29:34] Speaker 4: 10:32 AM, the first cover officer arrived and assisted with handcuffing Davis.

[29:40] Speaker 2: You piece of shit.

[29:41] Speaker 3: Stop it.

[29:41] Speaker 2: Stop hurting me.

[29:42] Speaker 3: Put your hand behind your back.

[29:44] Speaker 2: I am.

[29:44] Speaker 4: According to the body-worn camera time codes, the struggle lasted four minutes 32 seconds. Both officers were treated at the hospital, released, and are recovering from injuries. Davis was treated at the hospital and booked into jail on charges that include a ...

[30:01] Speaker 1: And, um, and I did mention earlier about performance, uh, levels on this thing. So we're in Portland, Oregon. A man faces multiple charges, including attempted murder after he attempted to take a Portland police officer's gun, uh, during a struggle that put two officers in the hospital on Saturday morning. It doesn't say it in the first paragraph, but he also choked the male officer too. So the male officer was on the receiving end of trying to ... Uh, uh, uh, the bad guy trying to take his gun and then choke him. Um, so the suspect ... So you may be wondering what the female officer was doing this time. I will tell you. So the suspect is 43-year-old Beau W. Davis of Portland, initially taken to the hospital after the nearly seven-minute skirmish. Uh, he tried to take an officer's gun, uh, with the, with, um, uh, with the officer eventually putting him in a neck hold that ended the altercation.

[30:43] Speaker 1: So, so it ...It, it kind of implies in that, in that paragraph that the officer whose gun was being taken or tried to be taken was the same guy that put him in the neck hold, but according to the article, it was the female, um, from what I read, that actually put him in the neck hold. Now, it says that the bad guy, Davis, was released from the hospital and he was booked. He faces charges of attempted murder, first-degree robbery, assaulting a public safety officer, menacing, and, uh, an outstanding warrant. Now, both officers were taken to the hospital. One had a hand injury, the other one had a head injury. And the injured officer's there, uh, at home recovering. So, they initially did not release the names of the officers, but then they finally did. So it's Officer David Randall, that's the male officer, and Melissa Bebason, that is the female. And, um, and they say that, um, the one that used the neck hold.

[31:31] Speaker 1: And also, um, she's been placed on paid administrative leave because the agency determines the, uh, car- chronic restraint or a neck hold as lethal force. And, um, they're treat- they treated her such, they put them on paid admin leave and they doing a big, big investigation. Now, um, it says also police checked the neighborhood, but they, um, they get a call, they look for the suspect, can't find him. 20 minutes later, uh, they find the guy in Oregon Park, and he's in a bathroom, he's in a stall. And so he comes out when the officers are asking for him to come out, they think he might be in there, and they go hands-on and the fight is on almost immediately. So, I'm gonna go and go to my show notes here, because I think they're a little bit more accurate. So they go hands-on, guy starts fighting about the 57, uh, 57-second mark. The female officer seems to diseng- disengage from the fight while her male partner continues to fight.

[32:20] Speaker 1: And according to my notes, at the one-minute mark, the suspect can clearly be seen grabbing the male officer's holstered pistol. The article says that they notified radio that the guy was going for the gun, and that's the point in time where I would like ready, you know, take action, don't get on the radio. But I got a lot of questions. And, uh, it says that that went on for about 25 seconds, trying to grab the gun. And it looks like we're gonna have to go to the commercial break before I finish. The male officer's, uh, body cam gets knocked to the ground, and at that time, they go strictly to the female officer's body cam. But guys, I'm gonna go and, uh, and take a break here for a second. We got a commercial break coming up. This story's about to get really, really good. Stick with us. We'll be right back. All right guys, it's time to talk about GunLearn at GunLearn.com. As law enforcement officers, we deal with guns and we deal with the ammunition every day.

[33:03] Speaker 1: It's what we don't know about them that gets us into trouble. Injuries, civil lawsuits, accidental discharges, misidentifications, lost prosecutions, and disciplinary issues. But GunLearn.com, they have your back. You can quickly become extremely firearm knowledgeable by simply learning 14 training modules from the convenience of your home or your office, or by attending a live seminar at GunLearn.com. You can also become a safe, accurate, and competent certified firearms specialist, like our very own Captain Brett Bartlett, and also attorney Ken Apianco. Now, the course has had huge success in raising the bar of firearm knowledge, and GunLearn has been a trusted source since way back in 2011 by gun manufacturers, federal agencies, forensic organizations, and even police departments nationwide. Now, the founder, Daniel Kelly, has got a deal for you. If you have your own agency, if you're chief or sheriff, you can host a seminar for absolutely no cost. It's an amazing opportunity.

[33:50] Speaker 1: You can go to GunLearn.com to get more information. Again, that is GunLearn.com. Welcome back. Leo Roundtable at LeoRoundtable.com, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip The Block and I'm your host. We're joined by former LAPD commander and co-host Jeff Weninger. He retired as a lieutenant, also authored a book called On Thin Ice at OnThinIceBook.com. And, uh, wow. We, uh, we just got into talking about a story, and yeah, we're not even, we're not even there yet. We're not done. It's, uh, Port- it's a story with a video component, a Portland police officer, uh, puts a suspect in a neck hold after nearly a seven-minute struggle over an officer's gun. And it is a, uh, there's a lot to unpack here, guys. And so, where I left off was just that, uh, we have a bad guy that the cops are looking for, and we've got a, uh, a male and a female officer. They go to a park and the bad guy is inside of a bathroom stall.

[34:42] Speaker 1: He comes out, they go hands-on, and, uh, and he had been, um, sma- he had a red pole, metal pole, he'd been smashing some cars with it and stuff. And he still had that on him. So they grab him. The fight goes down almost immediately, um, at one point. And look, I, from my perspective, Jeff and I haven't really talked in, in, in great detail about this, um, before the show. Uh, but, uh, I think it's fairly safe to argue that at about the 57-second mark, the female disengages, um, in, from the fight. And we're, we're, we're watching, we have a dual feed. The male's, the, the male officer's body cam and the female officer's body cam until the male officer loses the body cam and then the video goes strictly to hers. And, uh, so she's watching, um, a l- a lot of the fight going on. And, uh, her male partner, there's a point where the bad guy grabs his gun. It's a holster, and, and the bad guy's grabbing onto it though, and that reportedly happens for about 25 seconds.

[35:38] Speaker 1: The bad guy spends 25 seconds trying to get this cop's gun out of the holster. And the female is not hands-on then, she's, she's away, 'cause we've got a beautiful video that, feed from her body cam. The male officer's body cam gets knocked to the ground. Um, now we're on the female's, uh, body cam. The, uh, bad guy's pants, for some reason, fall down to his ankles and his shirt gets pulled over his head like a hockey player. Jeff, that's where you come in, you know? That's what I'm reminding, and the guy's wearing black briefs. At the one-minute-and-25-second mark, um, the, uh, two males, the bad guy and the male police officer, they go to the ground. And so the cop lands on his back, the bad guy's on top of him, and the female officer is patting the bad guy's back, basically, with her gloved hands. Sometimes the hands are open, sometimes they're closed, but she's basically, you know, knocking him, like a pat.

[36:33] Speaker 1: I mean, it's not even a, i- i- it's not even a, a, a, it wasn't an effective strike, 'cause it really wasn't even a strike. And, um, no impact weapon, and so I immediately are, I'm wondering about, you know, all the tools that we carry, you know, no impact weapon.... um, and then she pulls a taser out, but she does that from a distance. And so, she, she's up close and personal, decides not to do a drive stun, um, which is a, a contact stun from the, uh, from the taser. So, um, she does a, a taser, deploys the probes from a distance, they're not effective, and at two minutes and five seconds now, the suspect starts choking her male partner, who's still on his back. And, uh, she runs up and hits him, uh, in the back of the head with the plastic handle of the taser, no result. And then the suspect goes for the male officer's holstered firearm again, and the female officer, um, it says that h- she goes, um, hands on, but just open hands to the suspect's back again.

[37:26] Speaker 1: Her body cam, she's so close to him, her body cam, she's turning it on and off, the cycle's on and off a couple of times. And then you hear the male officer, um, on body cam, um, yelling for this guy to let go of his gun. And at two minutes and 57 seconds, um, we have backup starting to arrive, and they, uh, and then they end up going 10-15 with the guy. The fight lasted four minutes and 32 seconds, and you don't really see it in the video, but the article does say that, um, the bad guy th- was put in a neck restraint, which helped the fight end, or at least contained it enough, they say that it was the female officer. But there was one point where one paragraph implied that maybe it was the male officer, so I can't say with 100% certainty that it was the female. But most of the writing leads to the female doing the, uh, the, the, the neck restraint anyhow. So that's the way, uh, this thing ends. Uh, a lot to unpack. We got a little over five minutes. Jeff Weninger.

[38:20] Speaker 2: Well, I think this is really, it's about mindset, it's about competency, and it's about conditioning. Not just physical conditioning, but conditioning of your mind, and that means that you have to run these scenarios through your head before you're even faced with them. But the reality is, if you look at the data, like 25% of law enforcement, uh, officers in this country, they're not trained in any defensive tactics. 25%. And it looks as if Portland's not training their officers on this, because the number of times throughout this scenario there were levels of force that would've been absolutely appropriate to use, but weren't. And whether it was the male or the female officer, I saw inconsistencies in their ability to handle this level of, uh, physical assault upon their person.

[39:11] Speaker 2: Uh, when I'm talking about the male officer and he's grappling and he's down on the ground, I didn't see anything that's consistent with the training that I have received relative to Bra- Brazilian jujitsu type techniques that you used when someone's on top of you in order to get the, uh, the upper hand on 'em. Um, it, it just didn't appear that they were trained, and if they have been trained, then there's a lack of, um, ensuring that they remain competent in those techniques, because I- I didn't see anything from either of these officers relative to their ability to successfully handle this guy under the circumstance. We had a deadly force scenario, where the officer's gun, uh, at a minimum of two circumstances or incidents- incidents when we were watching the video, the- the suspect clearly had h- his hand in control of that- that weapon. And if he had been able to get it out of the, uh, the holster, th- i- i- this whole thing would've been ugly.

[40:09] Speaker 2: And I wasn't confident that the female officer had the mindset, and even actually was properly assessing the situation and knew what level of force she could actually use. And if she did in fact use the carotid restraint control hold, or upper body control hold, or chokehold, whatever they call it there, it certainly wasn't, uh, applied properly, 'cause if it is, they're out in- within seconds, and then it looks very different because they lose consciousness and you're able to cuff 'em up without any type of resistance. So, um, it- it was concerning f- uh, it was hard to watch, um, but unfortunately, uh, this- this is seen too often in law enforcement, where officers ha- have- have demonstrated that they're- they're not proficient in the techniques that need to be mastered in order to remain safe on the job.

[41:01] Speaker 2: And, um, you know, it's, people will say, "Well, they, the department doesn't train us." Well, you have a responsibility as a police officer that when you take that oath, that you're going to remain in physical condition as well as maintain your competency in all of these defensive tactics type things, and y- you go to your- your Brazilian jujitsu gyms and you get all this extra training on- on your own. You ensure that you're proficient and you can handle yourself, but I- I just didn't see it in the circumstance, and they- they were actually lucky.

[41:34] Speaker 1: Yeah, I- I, the female should be pulled off the street. I don't know if she's got the capability. I don't know if it's, I don't know if it's just a training issue with her or if she even has the capacity to do the job, to be honest with you. I don't, I mean, with what I saw, and the, even the panic from the voice and stuff, but just the, I'd like to see what she had in her gun belt. I know she had a firearm, and there certainly was justification to have used that at certain points. Um, backing away with a taser and- and you're right there in the fight, uh, with a- with a drive stun opportunity, and now you're relying on probes to make contact, and of course it doesn't happen. Drive stun's gonna work. Um, yeah, just so many, uh, j- just so many issues, uh, you know, that I, that I have. I- I- I'm in total agreement with you, but it, you know, it's just so y- a- a- and the guy.

[42:17] Speaker 1: You know, now, the only thing I might disagree, Jeff, on is that with being a defensive tactics instructor, you- y- you know, not all agents, not all agencies are the same. So we had, we did not want people to go through and get their own training, because we only wanted them to use what we taught them, and so there was a liability issue with if they're gonna go, um, do a, um, a takedown, or let's just say they called a choke or whatever, you know, we did a ca- uh, that carotid restraint technique for a while until it was outlawed, uh, but we didn't want people using techniques that we didn't teach them, 'cause now we're in the position where we have to defend them on court for something that we didn't teach them.

[42:49] Speaker 1: But there are agencies that don't really have defensive tactics training, and we had, we selected, we were very selective over which takedowns, arm bars, um, um, uh, pressure points that we taught, um, and like, uh, we never pu- unless it was a lethal force situation, we never, uh, with our, we don't like, we call it our dominant hand, we don't like to use the word strong hand, but we never punched somebody with our weapon hand. We only did a reaction punch 'cause we wanna make sure those bones aren't broken so we can go to the gun and stuff like that. So, um, but yeah, the training, the lack of training, and just the ability, it was just so scary. Um, and you're- you're so right, it's not just the female officer, the male officer as well, um, and at that point, someone goes for my gun, I want to create distance and I'm gonna be drawing my gun 'cause I don't wanna fight over it. If he approaches me, he's gonna get, he's gonna get shot.

[43:34] Speaker 1: But, um, well, we're coming up to the, uh, to the end of a show. Uh, any- any final words on this before we wind it down? And this is, you're right, there is so much to unpack on this, but, um, but both of these need to go back to the academy for some remedial... The female officer, I would- I would have a hard time keeping her employed if I was working the agency that had- that had had on this one, so

[43:55] Speaker 2: I think y- you make a great point, that the reality is is law enforcement is a very challenging career and it's not for everybody. And-

[44:03] Speaker 1: You're right, there's no shame in that.

[44:05] Speaker 2: Yeah, there isn't. You know, and it's, and- and you can get through your entire career and perhaps you'll never, uh, be confronted with a scenario that you'll be exposed, but the reality is is in the event that something happens, you need to earn your paycheck.

[44:20] Speaker 1: All right. Well, thank you, Jeff Weninger, also author of On Thin Ice at onthinicebook.com. I wanna mention The Wounded Blue. Uh, shout out to gulls.com, compliantetechnologies.com, gunlearn.com, medicare.lifesaferecruiting, and twobells.com. We'll see you guys back tomorrow, 12:00 noon Eastern. (upbeat music)