Militarization of Police

24 Armed Cops and a Military Truck Dispatched to Take Money from Old Man

|

MRAP
Public Domain

How many cops does it take to collect a civil judgment from a 75-year-old man? The town of Stettin, Wisconsin evidently believed the answer was 24β€”and an armored military vehicle for good measure.

The full might of the Stettin police force was dispatched to seize $80,000 from the elderly Roger Hoeppner, who restores antique trucks and old pallets on his 20 acres of property. Hoeppner originally got himself in trouble with the town because his junk collection violated certain zoning and sign ordinances. After years of legal disputes, a judge ruled that he would have to pay $80,000 in fines and attorney's fees for the town.

According to the Journal Sentinel:

Marathon County officials aren't apologizing for their tactics. Sheriff's Capt. Greg Bean said officials expected to have to seize and remove tractors and wooden pallets to pay the judgment β€” hence the cadre of deputies. He also said what while Hoeppner was never considered dangerous, he was known to be argumentative.

Bean said deputies had to handcuff Hoeppner because he was not following all their instructions, but did eventually agree to pay the $80,000 judgment after a visit to a bank β€” accompanied by deputies.

Bean also said the armored truck was summoned only after Hoeppner initially refused to come out of his house. Once the truck appeared, so did Hoeppner.

"I've been involved in about five standoff situations where, as soon as the MARV showed up, the person gives up," saving time, money and increasing safety, Bean said.

"People may not always understand why, but an armored vehicle is almost a necessity now," Bean said.

You heard it here first: A small-town cop thinks an armored vehicle is a necessity in order to remove harmless old men from their homes and confiscate their property.

Hoeppner, on the other hand, said the scene was frightening and cost his wife a trip to the hospital:

He described deputies with guns drawn walking around his garage.

Asked if he was, as the sheriff's captain described him, argumentative, Hoeppner admitted he was probably "hostile," though not threatening when confronted with a writ.

"The $86,000 figure is enough to shock most men," he said. "And they wanted it now, today." He said the town later agreed to $6,000 less because it wouldn't have to pay for hauling away his other equipment to sell.

Hoeppner estimates that, in all, his battle with the town has cost him about $200,000, a retirement fund he "worked very hard to accumulate." In addition, he said, his arrest the day the armored truck appeared upset his wife so much, he had to take her to a hospital for a few hours.

Read more from Reason on the disturbing trend of small-town police forces acquiring military weaponry and vehicles here.

NEXT: Poll: Russians Fear the United States More than ISIS-Type Terrorists

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Bean said deputies had to handcuff Hoeppner because he was not following all their instructions, but did eventually agree to pay the $80,000 judgment after a visit to a bank ? accompanied by deputies.”

    Armed men taking him to the bank to make a withdrawal? That reminds me of something. I just can’t think of the word.

    1. Let me try that next time one of my customers stiffs me. Should work out fine.

      1. “I learned from you!”

  2. “I’ve been involved in about five standoff situations where, as soon as the MARV showed up, the person gives up,” saving time, money and increasing safety, Bean said.

    “In the other seven standoffs involving our MARV, the person was killed, saving time, money and increasing safety.”

    1. What were they going to do with the MARV if he didn’t come out? Ram the front of his house?

      1. Yeah, this had me scratching my head.

      2. Shoot through the windows, throw flash-bangs and make a “dynamic entry”.

        1. But they don’t need an armored truck to do that

  3. “People may not always understand why, but an armored vehicle is almost a necessity now,” Bean said.“for me to achieve a full erection.”

    1. Keeping up with the Joneses — Cop style.

    2. People understand exactly why… It’s just so unspeakable that we dare not say it in public.

    3. Well, maybe not absolutely necessary, but if you’re going to commit an armed robbery like this, it could make that easier.

  4. he was known to be argumentative.

    In this day and age, he can be killed for this and nothing else will happen.

    1. It is known!

  5. while Hoeppner was never considered dangerous, he was known to be argumentative.

    How can a sheriff’s deputy be expected to return unscathed to his family when confronted with the risk of an old man’s derision and mockery?

    1. So he was just like Doug Pirhana?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmD8y0PJ2Vo

      But instead of sarcasm, he was argumentative!

    2. They were petrified of being told to “Get Off My Lawn!”

  6. I guess the police define “necessity” as “anything that makes my job slightly easier or more fun.”

  7. Armed men taking him to the bank to make a withdrawal? That reminds me of something. I just can’t think of the word.

    Smells like… JUSTICE.

  8. If they roll this heavy for an “argumentative” old man, I imagine they would’ve nuked my cunt-faced grandma from orbit.

    1. People think I’m cruel when I talk about those dogfuckers at the CDC.

      1. I’d let her fuck my dog. Note to self: get a dog.

    2. dude, at this point, i don’t believe shit in the news. i’ll wait for the jury.

    3. JTLYK, this is 3 years old. No less disgusting, mind, but a little out of date.

      1. If you haven’t read it yet, it’s still news.

        1. I think I’ve posted it over 20 times. Her trial was supposed to be this past summer but who knows? There was a case near there a few years back in which a lesbian judge shot her partner dead on the street in front of their home as she tried to leave the relationship. I can’t find a damn thing on whatever eventually happened.

          As for waiting for the jury,Kimberly Lindsay may well be innocent of the child molestation charge but there was photographic evidence of the dogfucking (actually dog blowing). No one disputes thisd. Her lawyer sought to suppress the CDC Director-on-dog porn on 4th Amendment grounds. The DA dropped the bestiality charge.

    4. So is she a registered sex offender yet, or is that list only for non-government employees?

    5. Pics or didn’t happen.

    6. Ok, she’s CHARGED. Not convicted. She isn’t working with children. If they fired her for being charged, before conviction, they would get hauled into court for violating her rights, regardless of whether she eventually got convicted. Or, at least, they should.

      Now, I’m willing to believe almost any enormity of a federal bureaucrat. But we are jumping to the conclusion she’s guilty, why exactly? The charges are bizarre. What’s the evidence? Who’s seen it, and why do we believe THEM?

  9. “He’s got an onion on his belt!!!” BLAMBLAMBLAM

    1. It was just the custom at the time!

      1. It wasn’t a white onion, on account of the war.

        1. In those days, nickels had bumblebees on them. Give me five bees for a quarter, we used to say.

  10. “People may not always understand why, but an armored vehicle is almost a necessity now,” Bean said.

    I understand why, because you’re a pants-shitting coward.

    1. Wouldn’t this be an opportune “teaching moment” to let us in on WHY it’s “almost” a “necessity”.

      1. If the cops showed up with an armored vehicle and threatened to drive through the front of your home, leaving it open to looters while you rotted in jail, do you think you might have more of an incentive to surrender?

  11. We won’t be laughing when the zombie apocalypse happens.

  12. In the comment section to the journal/sentinel article, someone lamented that the state that gave birth to the Progressive Party now used Nazi tactics like this. I had to inform him/her that the Nazi’s WERE Progressives too. I haven’t had the heart to go back for the lambasting I certainly received by the “it’s not fascism when we do it” crowd.

    1. But fascism is in the right, next to the libertarians. Tony told me so. And no, it doesn’t matter that fascism and communism are 90% identical or that complete control of society is the complete opposite to libertarianism, because the media sure loves to repeat that bullshit.

      1. Well, yeah. I mean, libertarians want the corporations to control everything without being restrained by the government, since the government is the only thing that protects us from rapacious corporations. The problem is that, because of libertarians, the corporations control the government. This is because libertarians prevent the government from having the power to control the corporations that control it. With sufficient power, a government of the people can wrest control of itself from the corporations, and then the government of the people will control the corporations! Three cheers for fascism! Hip hip hooray!

        1. I feel like this post should be accompanied by “THIS IS WHAT PROGRESSIVES ACTUALLY BELIEVE” a la South Park.

          1. It’s getting to be really obvious too. All of that talk about “unpatriotic” corporations incorporating in other countries so they can pay less tax is very fascist.

            1. I really don’t get that. Well, at least the ones that go to Europe. I thought Europe was so hyper regulated you need government oversight to tie your shoes.

              1. I thought Europe was so hyper regulated you need government oversight to tie your shoes.

                If you employ 10 people, the government owns you. If you employ an entire town of 10,000 people, you own the (local) government.

                Really, they suffer from the same problem as here: if you’re big enough, you can afford the costs (for a while), until the actual-no-kidding-really-we’re-Socialists party takes office.

                1. Okay, I see what you’re saying but there sort of there already. It’s kind of pointless to try to lower your tax bill if the savings are used up by having to pay fines because you broke regulation 4234233567.453422.56325324564.2234-B of the EU Code of Handkerchiefs.

              2. Is it really any worse than the US, at this point?

              3. The thing there is that the companies in question are already doing business in Europe (or in the case of Burger King, Canada) so they already bear those compliance costs. The point of “moving” is to avoid paying US taxes on money made overseas.

                1. Also, some European nations (i.e. Ireland) are legitimately better places to do business in due to fewer regulations.

                  That’s how low we’ve sunken.

        2. You know, if a corporation came to my property with an army to steal 80k from me, I’d be all in favor of the government stepping into protect me. But for some reason, I’m thinking it would be more like the wolves guarding the hen house.

      2. Fascism is sort of right win in the European sense, but not in the contemporary American sense. In Europe left and right are both authoritarian.

        It is very accurate to identify American Progeressives with Fascists. The problem is that most people think Nazi when you say Fascist. If you look at Fascism itself without all of the extra insane Nazi stuff, it really is pretty much exactly what American progressives want.

        1. When I think of fascism, I always think of a mix of national socialism and cronyism. Which is pretty much what both team red and team blue want, and what we actually have now. When I think of progressives, I think more about a mix of communist authoritarians and religious zealots. Unfortunately, we are approaching some type of hybrid version of all of those awful things.

    2. Wisconsin is full of Nazis, albeit closeted ones mostly. Ever heard of the German American Bund?

  13. Do NOT trick-or-treat at the Hoeppners this year.

  14. Nothing left to cut.

    1. …said the mohel to the baby.

  15. my friend’s step-aunt makes $77 every hour on the laptop . She has been fired for 10 months but last month her pay was $12039 just working on the laptop for a few hours. go to this web-site …..

    ?????? http://www.cashbuzz40.com

  16. Bean also said the armored truck was summoned only after Hoeppner initially refused to come out of his house. Once the truck appeared, so did Hoeppner.

    So they were threatening to kill him in the Branch Davidian method? That’s the only conclusion I can come to here.

    1. So they were threatening to kill him in the Branch Davidian method? That’s the only conclusion I can come to here.

      The very next paragraph!

      You probably missed it because the entire piece is bullshit hysteteria mongering. In context helps:

      Bean also said the armored truck was summoned only after Hoeppner initially refused to come out of his house. Once the truck appeared, so did Hoeppner.

      “I’ve been involved in about five standoff situations where, as soon as the MARV showed up, the person gives up,” saving time, money and increasing safety, Bean said.

      Now let’s fit it all together

      1) When suspects are in standoff, refusing to come out.
      2) They call in the vehicle.
      3) The person immediately surrenders.

      Apparently, they use the menacing vehicle to scare the shit out the suspect, who then surrenders. That would work for me/ Would it work for you?

      Or should they instead kick down the front door with guns drawn (as they MUST be) and take the suspect by force? Like all other cops that piss us off?

      Now who tells Reason that they published the fuckup of the decade? Check his source and you’ll see the police were there to collect a judgment that was over four years old. Hmmmmm

      We can’t PROVE that he intended to create the hysteria that we see up and down this page. But it does make one wonder, eh?

      1. Apparently, they use the menacing vehicle to scare the shit out the suspect, who then surrenders. That would work for me/ Would it work for you?

        That’s why you’re a bootlicking piece of shit who isn’t fit to live with other human beings.

        -jcr

  17. When one wants to collect a civil judgment and the debtor cannot or refuses to pay cash, it is customary to enlist a constable or sheriff in a sale of the debtor’s possessions in what is know as a ‘sheriff’s sale’. But what sheriff is going to put up with that shit when he’s the one owed and he controls an armed posse and an MARV? Sure makes collection easier when you can get away with it. Hell, it’s probably so much fun for them that they may consider this method instead of those boring sheriff sales for all their collection activities.

    1. Geez, and you started out so well. πŸ™‚
      Are you aware thy were collecting a judgment rendered years ago, on a dispute dating from 2008? Of course you don’t know, unless you clicked to his source where all the dates and legal issues are nicely laid out. Apparently this writer doesn’t know the topic well enough to know what’s relevant. His conclusion is contradicted by his own quotes!

  18. I’d actually like to know more about the original kerfuffle regarding the sign and zoning ordinances.

    It sure looks to me like Stettin, WI is out in the middle of nowhere. I want to see pictures of how bad his property was and how visible it was to his neighbors.

    Actually, I don’t. Because I know it is going to be one of those deals where it is out in the country, but some busy body neighbor didn’t like looking at some cars when they drove past on their way to town and raised a ruckus.

    We need to shame any of the neighbors who fucking sicced the government on him in the first place (unless they were paying his property taxes for him).

    1. None of that matters. Read the source and the court already ordered the judgment and denied the appeal, several years ago … on a dispute that traces back to 2008.

      We’d all have saved a lot of grief if Reason had reported all the relevant facts, from their own source, instead of imitating the wackos at World Net Daily.

  19. This was Hoeppner’s fault for not adequately securing his property against armored vehicles.

  20. If he had the money in his bank account, this whole exercise was overkill. Step One: Do a judgment debtor exam and find out what accounts he has. Step Two: Serve a writ of execution on the bank where he has an account. Boom. Done. No need for a MARV or 24 men.

    1. What fun would that be? They wouldn’t get to drive the MARV, put on all their Army costumes and break out the full-auto assault rifles and grenade launchers. You know they had all that shit there and were just waiting for “the target” to resist just a little bit and then BANG! Hard-ons for all the boys in blue.

  21. “Chief Deputy Parks has had a long and distinguished career at the Marathon County Sheriff’s Department,” said Governor Walker. “Scott is a calm leader, a trait that is highly regarded in the law enforcement community. His compassion for the Department and the citizens of Marathon County will only enhance the Sheriff’s Office and move it forward.”

    Scott Walker, the darling of the right-wing establishment, picks his authoritarian henchman well it appears.

  22. Fuck the police. And zoning laws.

  23. Little boys with their grown up toys– sent out to war against the good citizens who don’t comply with the sick twisted demands of their overlords?

    1. Are you also a Birther?

      Go read the source. They were collecting a judgement rendered over four years ago — owed to the same city which sent the cops to collect. A four year delinquency.

      Read the source. Tribal loyalty is always trumnped by facts.

  24. So, has anyone added up the costs of Operation No Arguments Please?

  25. Let them have their little toys if it makes their penis seem longer. No Worries. I saw those things turned into ovens in Kiev. just sayin’

  26. You heard it here first: A small-town cop thinks an armored vehicle is a necessity in order to remove harmless old men from their homes and confiscate their property

    We heard it here first because its bullshit, per YOUR source.
    They were collecting a long overdue debt. Reason lies about how the vehicle was used. PER REASON’S OWN QUOTE!

    from Reason’s source (emphasis mine)
    In 2008, the town sued Hoeppner over claimed violations of ordinances about zoning, signs, rubbish and vehicles. About a year later, the two sides settled …

    In September 2010, a judge ordered Hoeppner to remove certain items from his land.

    In April 2013, the judge entered a final judgment that imposed a $500-a-day fine against Hoeppner for not adhering to the original May 2011 order, and granting the town’s legal fees.

    …………. (May 2011! OMG)

    Reason QUOTES Captain Bean saying armored vehicles had caused five surrenders in standoffs, the same as Hoepner’s refusal to come out.

    Apparently, the vehicle scares the shit out of suspects who then surrender. SHOULD THEY INSTEAD KICK DOWN THE DOORS WITH GUNS DRAWN? WTF

    Bean can be lying through his teeth. But why quote him, then ignore your own freaking quote?

    Was THIS a libertarian moment?

    1. “Apparently, the vehicle scares the shit out of suspects who then surrender. SHOULD THEY INSTEAD KICK DOWN THE DOORS WITH GUNS DRAWN? WTF”

      They could just knock on the doors like every other person in the entire country does. Or if he’s really bad, they could just have a few officers hang out of sight, and then nab him when he leaves the house.

      There’s really no need for kicking in doors, driving armored vehicles, or any of this shit. They are a pitiful substitute for patience and police work.

  27. 80 grand should be about enough to buy that thing a tank of gas.

    You know, what this boils down to is that they are robbing that guy because they don’t like how his yard looks.

    1. They’re not that awful, they probably get 10 MPG or so. (Diesel or JP8, of course.) The big costs are maintenance.

    2. You know, what this boils down to is that they are robbing that guy because they don’t like how his yard looks.

      Yeah. Pretty much. Gotta wonder why the government expects him to pay their legal costs because he lost his case, but no way would it be required to pay his if he had won. Probably just another instance of FYTW.

  28. Stettin, WI. Out in the middle of nowhere. Not big enough to need 24 cops and a tank. Looks to me like someone coveted his 20 acres, and is in the process of using the government to steal it. Perhaps they need to go hunting more often in those parts.

    1. More likely some developer wants it – or wants some neighboring property to be more attractive. Eyesores drive away the “quality” folks with money,you know.

  29. ‘”People may not always understand why, but an armored vehicle is almost a necessity now,” Bean said.’

    That would apparently include people like myself who have military experience in the operations and tactics of armored vehicles, including their use in cordon and search operations.

  30. Hoeppner originally got himself in trouble with the town because his junk collection violated certain zoning and sign ordinances

    More like, the looters decided to use the pretext of “zoning” to rob an elderly man of his earnings.

    -jcr

  31. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail

    ———————- http://www.jobs700.com

  32. IF only they had a time machine.

    “Get in the Armoured Car – Emmett Till, We wanna talk wit you….”

    “Yep. jes one looky at the tank and them coloreds get right coooperative – I reckon you git what I’m sayin….”

  33. Obama said he wanted a domestic military. He has set out to build one with every talking about it again. This is not policing. This is militarization and intimidation. We need to pull back all the military equipment that was given to police departments around the country. If the police think they need an armored vehicle, they are welcome to buy their own.

    1. If the police think they need an armored vehicle, they are welcome to buy their own.

      Oh, they would – with money they get from asset seizure and forfeiture.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.