John & Martha held by police at gun point

[jesse]

I suspect a "stolen airplane" was very exciting to local law enforcement and sounds serious, "drug runners", etc. As a result they over-reacted a little bit because they were operating in an unfamiliar environment.

Nervous or excited cops with guns drawn make me very nervous. Move slowly and treat them with respect and most of the time the high-tension guns are drawn moment will go away quickly. I prefer that. I don't like guns pointed at me.

I can't draw a firearm just because someone else has made me nervous - if I do it - I better be able to prove that they were demonstrating their ability to take my life. Perhaps law enforcement should have to justify the reason for pointing a deadly weapon at someone. But I have mixed feelings about that - it's a very slippery slope for their safety. They're naturally at more risk then I am on a day-to-day basis.

 

[DeeG]

Can you explain how having the guns pointed at me enhances my safety?

You're a bad guy in a stolen vehicle. Officer points a gun at you while he waits for backup.

Are you going to try to run? (which might get you shot, but will probably get you tazed, like the dipstick yesterday who decided to bail out of the stolen car he was driving).

Maybe you'll drive off, leaving the officer in your dust. Not a good idea, either, he or one of his buddies will catch up with you and your car will probably get pitted, which may or may not, cause injury to you. then you'll get hauled out at gunpoint and taken physically to the ground, someones knee will be on your back holding you down while you get handcuffed, and THAT is probably gonna hurt.

Or perhaps pull out a gun of your own? (which WILL get you shot).

See? Having a gun pointed at you allows you to realize that you better just sit there and do what you're told or you will probably get hurt.

 

[TMetzinger]

I used to moonlight at a clinic on weekends, and would sleep up in the Doctor's lounge rather than drive back home One night I was roused by two cops with guns in my face. After I was fully awake and responsive it all calmed down. I showed that I worked there by showing my key and the alarm code, and they went on their way. They found me because the back door didn't close properly and was open. Given the amount of drugs and other stealable stuff we had, I don't blame them for walking into a dark space with weapons out - I'd have done the same.

To John and Martha's situation, I can see where reasonable cops thinking they were dealing with a stolen airplane might respond with weapons out. There are all sorts of ways for a stop of a car or plane to go wrong. The key factor would be how quickly the cops realized the reality of the situation and went back to a normal posture.

And I blame the FAA for re-issuing the number without clearing it from what ever registry of stolen aircraft it resided on - this may be one of the unintended side effects of their new plan to "clean up" registrations by making them expire after three years.

 

[Ted]

Did the Kings try to make a hasty getaway?

No, but David explained the rationale, I believe very well.

And as far as John and Martha being two of the most recognizable pilots out there, if you're not a pilot, how would you know "who" they were?

Exactly. I explained to a new student of mine on Saturday that the aviation community is so small that it is very common to have met a lot of the big names, leaders, and policy makers. However as soon as you leave the aviation community, nobody knows who any of those people are. On this forum alone we have authors, employees from at least one engine manufacturer, FAA employees, etc. How many Ford employees do you find on the Ford truck forum?

If the car reported stolen was a 68 Camaro and he pulls me over in a 2000's Corvette just because the plates match, I certainly don't want anyone with that diminished mental capacity holding a gun to my head or chest. Maybe the before jumping out of his car and pulling the gun on me, he oughta call back to dispactch or whatever and say hey, this is a 1997-2004 2 seater I pulled over, not a 1968 Camaro.

If they can't tell the difference between aircraft, they shouldn't be attempting to "recover" them. Same goes for cars, or any other number of things.

Yeah, but a new 172 looks a whole lot like an old 172, which could've been made the same year as a 152. How do you tell the difference between a 2006 172 and a 1976 172 from 30 ft away? I'd challenge you to do so as a pilot who knows the difference between a 152 and a 172, other than by the paint job.

Your expectations are unreasonable. LEOs can't be experts on everything, and to have them do so would cause increased costs and taxes for people with more training and education in things that don't matter. Alternately, more likely more speeding tickets since that's the fastest way to tax people without them being able to argue about it, which would mean you'd get pulled over in your Vette more often.

I am the first person to say that I am not a fan of law enforcement for a number of reasons (sorry to the good cops we have on here). I've come across a large number on power trips who think that they're above the law, and there are a number of habits that the NYPD has that has instilled in me a hearty disdain for law enforcement at large. Yet they still do have jobs to do, and they are doing it with inadequate information that is frequently incorrect, just like you and me.

 

[roncachamp]

The officers there were told that the tail number came back to a stolen airplane. They did what they were supposed to do. One of my guys makes a traffic stop and I see that the car/license plate is stolen? I relay that to the officer and you can bet the occupants will come out of that vehicle at gunpoint. And if the registered owner of the car just happens to be the one driving? Doesn't matter, car is still in the system as stolen. He/She has some 'splaining to do before they are released.

Apparently intelligent people are simply not drawn to police work.

 

[AdamZ]

I suspect a "stolen airplane" was very exciting to local law enforcement and sounds serious, "drug runners", etc. As a result they over-reacted a little bit because they were operating in an unfamiliar environment.

Nervous or excited cops with guns drawn make me very nervous. Move slowly and treat them with respect and most of the time the high-tension guns are drawn moment will go away quickly. I prefer that. I don't like guns pointed at me.

I can't draw a firearm just because someone else has made me nervous - if I do it - I better be able to prove that they were demonstrating their ability to take my life. Perhaps law enforcement should have to justify the reason for pointing a deadly weapon at someone. But I have mixed feelings about that - it's a very slippery slope for their safety. They're naturally at more risk then I am on a day-to-day basis.

Well put. Whats interesting is that no one has addressed the company that provided the incorrect information to the police.

 

[DeeG]

If the car reported stolen was a 68 Camaro and he pulls me over in a 2000's Corvette just because the plates match, I certainly don't want anyone with that diminished mental capacity holding a gun to my head or chest. Maybe the before jumping out of his car and pulling the gun on me, he oughta call back to dispactch or whatever and say hey, this is a 1997-2004 2 seater I pulled over, not a 1968 Camaro.

If they can't tell the difference between aircraft, they shouldn't be attempting to "recover" them. Same goes for cars, or any other number of things.

And dispatch is going to tell him, the plate you ran came back to a stolen 68 Camaro. And he's going to wonder WHY plates off a stolen Camaro are now on a Corvette. Is the Corvette stolen too? And because of that, he is going to approach the Corvette as if it were stolen. That is the reality.

And if you aren't bright enough to notice that the license plates that are on your car aren't the right ones, then perhaps you shouldn't be allowed to drive???? I certainly wouldn't want someone with that diminished mental capacity to be sharing the road with me.

 

[EdFred]

Your expectations are unreasonable. LEOs can't be experts on everything, and to have them do so would cause increased costs and taxes for people with more training and education in things that don't matter. Alternately, more likely more speeding tickets since that's the fastest way to tax people without them being able to argue about it, which would mean you'd get pulled over in your Vette more often.

I'll say it again. If they don't know what they are looking at, they shouldn't be trying to recover it.

 

[roncachamp]

Are you going to do anything other than put your hands either: 1) in the air; or 2) out the window?

Do you know how many police shootings there are because a police officer mistakenly, yet wholly justifiably, thinks a person is holding a gun?

Same thing applies in traffic stops. If I'm a cop and I'm dealing with a stolen vehicle stop, and I see someone reach into the glovebox or center console, I'm thinking "is he getting a gun." My adrenaline is going to jump a few notches, and my rational-decision-making-ability is going to correspondingly drop a few notches. Maybe you're just getting out your registration, but if I'm dealing with a stolen vehicle, that's not an assumption that I can afford to make.

That might not be "right" or "fair," but that's what happens. It's how bad decisions get made. Again, unfair, but I'll take gun pointed at me over gun pointed at me and fired any day of the week.

So, if having the guns pointed at you keeps you from doing something stupid that might otherwise get you shot, and if it keeps a cop from getting shot, I don't have too much of a problem with it. I don't like it, but I'll blame your car-thieves-with-deadly-weapons before I break out the jack-boot arguments.

Well, as I wouldn't be doing something stupid that might otherwise get me shot, having the guns pointed at me does not enhance my safety in any way. But it does increase my chances of getting shot, so having the guns pointed at me reduces my safety.

 

[EdFred]

And dispatch is going to tell him, the plate you ran came back to a stolen 68 Camaro. And he's going to wonder WHY plates off a stolen Camaro are now on a Corvette. Is the Corvette stolen too? And because of that, he is going to approach the Corvette as if it were stolen. That is the reality.

And if you aren't bright enough to notice that the license plates that are on your car aren't the right ones, then perhaps you shouldn't be allowed to drive???? I certainly wouldn't want someone with that diminished mental capacity to be sharing the road with me.

I look at my license plates once a year - when I put my registration tags on em. But I can tell the difference between my Colorado and my Corvette. I would also be willing to wager my paycheck that 99% of the people on the board did not look at their license plates this morning before they drove into work. I guess we're all idiots.

 

[DeeG]

Apparently intelligent people are simply not drawn to police work.

Has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence, or lack there of, that's just the rules. Stolen is stolen. If the r/o of the vehicle reported it as stolen, then finds it and 'forgets' to tell the cops that its not stolen anymore, well.......that's their problem. It happens a lot. And usually the excuse is: "uhhh, welll.... ummm...ahhhh... I didn't think I needed to tell them." Genius IQ right there, I tell ya.

 

[roncachamp]

You're a bad guy in a stolen vehicle.

No, I'm a good guy in my own vehicle.

Officer points a gun at you while he waits for backup.

Backup for what?

Are you going to try to run?

No.

Maybe you'll drive off, leaving the officer in your dust.

I wouldn't do that either.

Or perhaps pull out a gun of your own?

I don't own a gun.

See? Having a gun pointed at you allows you to realize that you better just sit there and do what you're told or you will probably get hurt.

You're right, for I have a moron with a badge pointing a gun at me.

 

[roncachamp]

To John and Martha's situation, I can see where reasonable cops thinking they were dealing with a stolen airplane might respond with weapons out. There are all sorts of ways for a stop of a car or plane to go wrong. The key factor would be how quickly the cops realized the reality of the situation and went back to a normal posture.

Agreed, I think the cops should have realized the reality of the situation and gone back to a normal posture earlier than they did.

 

[roncachamp]

Has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence, or lack there of, that's just the rules. Stolen is stolen.

Ya think? If the registered owner of the car just happens to be the one driving it should be obvious the information in the system is wrong and no further explanation necessary.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

Well, as I wouldn't be doing something stupid that might otherwise get me shot, having the guns pointed at me does not enhance my safety in any way. But it does increase my chances of getting shot, so having the guns pointed at me reduces my safety.

How are the police officers supposed to know any of that? These things aren't judged based on hindsight - they're judged based exclusively on what's known at the time.

At the time, it's known that you're in a vehicle that's been reported stolen, and that all of the facts as told to the police have been corroborated. That's...just how it works. Don't like it? Change the Constitution.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

No, I'm a good guy in my own vehicle.

Backup for what?

No.

I wouldn't do that either.

I don't own a gun.

None of that is known at the time. As stated above, these things are judged by what's known at the time.

Of course, if you're in favor of an ends justfies the means approach to law enforcement, surely you're ok with "we're going to search you, and if you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to fear."

You're right, for I have a moron with a badge pointing a gun at me.

And thus the grudge against the police comes out.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

Ya think? If the registered owner of the car just happens to be the one driving it should be obvious the information in the system is wrong and no further explanation necessary.

Which is, get this, only known after the initial contact. The initial contact is where the concern in these situations lies.

 

[Ted]

I'll say it again. If they don't know what they are looking at, they shouldn't be trying to recover it.

That means police shouldn't require to recover any stolen property, since they can't tell that your 2000ish yellow Corvette has the proper plates and VIN, and can't confirm whether it is or not without disturbing the person driving it.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Well put. Whats interesting is that no one has addressed the company that provided the incorrect information to the police.

As posted on Beechtalk:


They are not "Private". It is run mainly by the Drug Enforcement Administration.


In 1974, the Department of Justice (DOJ) submitted a report entitled A Secure Border: An Analysis of Issues Affecting the U.S. Department of Justice to the Office of Management and Budget. The report provided recommendations on how to improve drug- and border-enforcement operations along the Southwest border. One of the recommendations proposed the establishment of a regional intelligence center to collect and disseminate information relating to drug, alien, and weapon smuggling in support of field enforcement entities throughout the region. In response to that study, the El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC) was created and was initially staffed by representatives of the Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Customs Service, and U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Agencies currently represented at EPIC include the Drug Enforcement Administration; Department of Homeland Security; Customs & Border Protection; Immigration & Customs Enforcement; U.S. Coast Guard; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; U.S. Secret Service; U.S. Marshals Service; National Drug Intelligence Center; Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of the Interior; National Geospatial–Intelligence Agency; U.S. Department of Defense; Joint Task Force–North; Joint Interagency Task Force–South; Texas Department of Public Safety; Texas Air National Guard; and the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office.

Initially, EPIC, as the facility became known, focused on the United States-Mexico border with an emphasis on Mexico's heroin traffickers and illegal alien smugglers. With the increased use of aircraft, seagoing vessels, and global networks to facilitate drug trafficking, EPIC's focus broadened and became international in scope. So not only does EPIC serve Federal agencies, all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Canada, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam, but also supports law enforcement efforts conducted by foreign counterparts throughout the world, and currently has Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with Canada, Australia, and The Netherlands. In response to increased multiagency needs, EPIC developed into a fully coordinated, tactical intelligence center supported by databases and resources from member agencies.

In 2001, immediately after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, DC, the multiagency environment of EPIC was called upon to support investigations to find those responsible. EPIC’s mission evolved from its experience in supporting interdiction efforts and investigations regarding drug trafficking, alien and weapon smuggling, and other criminal activities, by adding counterterrorism to its efforts.

EPIC’s vision is to continue to provide timely and expeditious support to Federal, State, local, tribal, and international law enforcement agencies and to remain the premier tactical operational intelligence center in the nation.

 

[roncachamp]

How are the police officers supposed to know any of that?

How are they supposed to know I'm not doing something stupid that might otherwise get me shot? By observing me and recognizing that I'm not doing anything like that.

These things aren't judged based on hindsight - they're judged based exclusively on what's known at the time.

At the time, it's known that you're in a vehicle that's been reported stolen, and that all of the facts as told to the police have been corroborated.

Can you explain why the cops cannot ascertain that the vehicle has not been stolen without pointing guns at me?

That's...just how it works. Don't like it?

Change the Constitution.

The US Constitution? What part of the Constitution do you believe is in play here?

 

[mantakos]

Walking up to a plane which is reported stolen, but isn't really stolen, occupied by innocents, with guns pointing at them is too much force.

Walking up to a plane which is reported stolen, and is stolen, occupied by the thieves, with gun holstered and a friendly smile on your face, is too little force, and a great way to get killed in the line of duty.

So, you see, it's quite simple, the officer merely has to use just enough force as required depending on whether the occupants are guilty or not. This determination is perfectly easy to make only a few minutes after the time of the decision of how much force to use. I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today, and I will surely decide right now what to do based on information I'll have a few minutes in the future.

BTW, this is a failure of "administrative systems". It's yet another reason why talented software engineers need to be put in charge of everything.
-harry

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

David: I don't know the entire story, just what's been presented. The officers approaching the plane or asking the occupants to get out doesn't bother me. The threatened use of deadly force does.

Why must an LEO draw (and in this case several) and point a deadly weapon at folks like this in this circumstance? Why couldn't they deal with a reasonable explanation on the scene?

They know mistakes can happen as much as anyone! They can be behind cover as the folks get out and they can have weapons at the ready if needed.

I don't think weapons should be pointed at innocent citizens unnecessarily. And, if a reasonable explanation is offered, someone should be paying attention and be willing to endeavor to reasonably address the issue, not just back these folks as criminals.

Best,

Dave

Dave,

I think I might have addressed your questions indirectly. Didn't mean to ignore your questions - frankly, I agree with what you've written, but at the same time, there are plenty of people out there who have shown themselves willing to open fire.

At the end of the day, our system creates a compromise between the interests of liberty and the interests of enforcing the law. Sometimes the scale tips in favor of liberty, and sometimes in favor of law enforcement.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

How are they supposed to know I'm not doing something stupid that might otherwise get me shot? By observing me and recognizing that I'm not doing anything like that.

They can't observe you. Your hands can't be seen in your car unless they're on the steering wheel or out the window. Same with any other vehicle, except maybe a center-console boat.

Go for a ride-along sometime. Might help you understand things a little bit better.

Can you explain why the cops cannot ascertain that the vehicle has not been stolen without pointing guns at me?

Because their records indicate that it is stolen, and until they make contact with you personally, there's simply no other way to ascertain otherwise. VIN's can't be read from 50' away, nor can your mind.

The US Constitution? What part of the Constitution do you believe is in play here?

The part that expressly deals with this issue - the 4th Amendment. It provides that you're to be free from unreasonable gov't intrusion absent some kind of cause to unreasonably interfere with you.

The 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments are also implicated, to an extent.

 

[roncachamp]

None of that is known at the time.

It's all known by me.

As stated above, these things are judged by what's known at the time.

The absence of sound judgment by the cops is the heart of the issue.

And thus the grudge against the police comes out.

Hey, you created the scenario!

 

[TMetzinger]

<disclaimer>Though I used to be in the DEA, it's been over ten years</disclaimer>

EPIC is the El Paso Intelligence Center, and is comprised of multiple federal agencies as well as state and local. It's a clearinghouse for information and dedicated to connecting the dots. If EPIC said an airplane is stolen, that information came from the FAA or data from a case.

There is a HUGE problem looming with the quality of data in various federal databases, particularly when they are merged. Database A gets imported into Database B at one point, but future updates to A don't show up in B, and eventually the folks who rely on B end up making bad decisions.

All of the above takes the blame away from the cops on the scene, who probably did the best they could with the admittedly bad data they had to work on.

 

[roncachamp]

Which is, get this, only known after the initial contact.

And then the cuffs go on.

 

[roncachamp]

They can't observe you. Your hands can't be seen in your car unless they're on the steering wheel or out the window. Same with any other vehicle, except maybe a center-console boat.

All they have to do is ask, and that doesn't require drawing a gun.

Because their records indicate that it is stolen, and until they make contact with you personally, there's simply no other way to ascertain otherwise.

A brief examination of license and registration will indicate their records are incorrect, and that doesn't require drawing a gun.

The part that expressly deals with this issue - the 4th Amendment. It provides that you're to be free from unreasonable gov't intrusion absent some kind of cause to unreasonably interfere with you.

We're discussing an unreasonable gov't intrusion without some kind of cause to unreasonably interfere.

The 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments are also implicated, to an extent.

What specific language in those amendments are you referring to?

 

[EdFred]

That means police shouldn't require to recover any stolen property, since they can't tell that your 2000ish yellow Corvette has the proper plates and VIN, and can't confirm whether it is or not without disturbing the person driving it.

They can "disturb" me without cuffin and stuffin like Roscoe P Coltrain was so fond of doing.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

It's all known by me.

For sure - which is why it's important that you not get shot before you can inform the police as to the actual situation.

The absence of sound judgment by the cops is the heart of the issue.

Well, let's think about this.

Someone is beating on your door at 2 in the morning. You have no idea of who it is or what they want. You grab your gun and, from around the corner, point it at the door and yell at the person, "who the eff are you?"

Suppose it turns out that you live in one of those cookie-cutter developments, where all the houses look the same. The person beating on your door is your neighbor from one street away who lives in the same house one street away - he's just moved in a week ago, and can't figure out why his roommate would have locked him out.

Are you unjustified in pointing the gun at the door before you know that? Did you not exercise sound judgment?

That's why, when these things come up in court, we look at what the police knew at the time the incident occurred, rather than what was discovered afterwards. What that means is that: 1) not finding wrongdoing doesn't necessarly invalidate the action; and 2) finding wrongdoing doesn't necessarily validate the action.

Hey, you created the scenario!

Yeah, I guess I did.

 

[roncachamp]

For sure - which is why it's important that you not get shot before you can inform the police as to the actual situation.

And getting shot is more likely if the cops approach with guns drawn.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

All they have to do is ask, and that doesn't require drawing a gun.

A brief examination of license and registration will indicate their records are incorrect, and that doesn't require drawing a gun.

Right, and I agree, but all of that happens after initial contact. Which is where the issues we're discussing arise.

At the time of initial contact, all you (as a cop) are going to know is that: 1) we have a vehicle reported stolen; and 2) stolen vehicle situations can turn fatal, to either yourself or the occupants, and also have the potential to escalate beyond the immediate scenario (for instance, a high-speed chase, which ain't good for anyone).

We're discussing an unreasonable gov't intrusion without some kind of cause to unreasonably interfere.

What specific language in those amendments are you referring to?

Well, the 5th and 6th are due process, the right to counsel, jury trial, etc. - incidentally impacted in any transaction with the gov't. Not directly applicable, but they're always worth remembering. The 14th is what prevents the States from infringing on these rights, and 90% of these situations will involve state/local police forces.

 

[JeffDG]

How did you arrive at that number? I make it 1,156,000.

I got that when I did 10*10*10*34*34, but it's actually 10*11*11*35*35 because all but the first one (ie. like N1) can be either a number, or a number or letter (except I/O) or nothing, in that you can have N1, N12, N123, N1234,N123GA

So, I get 1,482,250

 

[EdFred]

SBA is a Class C airport. There was absolutely NO ONE around the cops could have asked, "Hey is that a 1968 Cessna 150?" ??

I'm going to assume that they were already at the airport waiting for them to arrive.

 

[JeffDG]

I'm shocked this hasn't come up yet...

 

[SkyHog]

Maybe they should have just shot the Kings' dog instead.

Then, they'd be justified in their actions.

 

[mantakos]

Maybe they should have just shot the Kings' dog instead...

But only if they were Chihuahuas, and thus suspect of being in the country illegally.
-harry

 

[mantakos]

I got that when I did 10*10*10*34*34, but it's actually 10*11*11*35*35 because all but the first one (ie. like N1) can be either a number, or a number or letter (except I/O) or nothing, in that you can have N1, N12, N123, N1234,N123GA...

I think your equation is counting "N12 45" among the possibles.
-harry

 

[sba55]

David: I don't know the entire story, just what's been presented. The officers approaching the plane or asking the occupants to get out doesn't bother me. The threatened use of deadly force does.

Why must an LEO draw (and in this case several) and point a deadly weapon at folks like this in this circumstance? Why couldn't they deal with a reasonable explanation on the scene?

They know mistakes can happen as much as anyone! They can be behind cover as the folks get out and they can have weapons at the ready if needed.

I don't think weapons should be pointed at innocent citizens unnecessarily. And, if a reasonable explanation is offered, someone should be paying attention and be willing to endeavor to reasonably address the issue, not just back these folks as criminals.

Best,

Dave

Dave - The problem I see is that most of the US police departments have little ability to respond to situations with appropriate force. Because there are quite a few instances where police are confronted with very dangerous individuals, police tend to act on the extreme side of caution and they tend to overreact badly.

In Europe, for example, the focus is largely on law enforcement through cooperation with the community and these extreme overreactions are very uncommon. But of course police aren't usually confronted with the same kind of dangers when they pull over a car as they are here. Sadly, I don't know that we can do much about this situation without first addressing the larger issue of gangs, ubiquitous weapons ownership by criminals, power trips by police, etc. I do like that LEOs in many Europen countries have to wear pretty silly uniforms because that keeps the "military-wannabes" out of the force.

-Felix

 

[JeffDG]

I think your equation is counting "N12 45" among the possibles.
-harry

Could be...but the other number was missing numbers like N1 and N4GA that I know exist.

So, I guess you'd need to go:

9 (first number can't be zero) + 9*34 (for 2 "digit" N numbers) + 9*34*34 (3 "digit") + 9*10*34*34 + 9*10*10*34*34
Which brings us to...
1,155,159.00

 

[Bob Noel]

BTW, this is a failure of "administrative systems". It's yet another reason why talented software engineers need to be put in charge of everything.
-harry

There aren't enough of us. :wink2: