View Full Version : Local Cops Ready for War With Homeland Security-Funded Military Weapons
dennisuello
12-21-11, 15:29
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/20/local-cops-ready-for-war-with-homeland-security-funded-military-weapons.html
So is this suposed to be a bad thing?
Fargo Police Lt. Ross Renner, who commands the regional SWAT team: “It’s foolish to not be cognizant of the threats out there, whether it’s New York, Los Angeles, or Fargo. Our residents have the right to be protected. We don’t have everyday threats here when it comes to terrorism, but we are asked to be prepared.”
I'd have to say I agree with Lt. Renner. As long as the equipment is used correctly, i say good for them. Hopefully they train accordingly..
Littlelebowski
12-21-11, 15:43
I'd have to say I agree with Lt. Renner. As long as the equipment is used correctly, i say good for them. Hopefully they train accordingly..
It will be used for the "war" on drugs.
The article said the North Hollywood Shootout lasted for hours... AFAIK from them walking into the bank to both being dead was around a half hour. SWAT showed up with exactly the kind of equipment they are criticizing in the article and gave them dirt naps.
Littlelebowski
12-21-11, 15:48
From what I read, the local PD had to go buy rifles at a local gunshop which was later shut down by the BATF.
From what I read, the local PD had to go buy rifles at a local gunshop which was later shut down by the BATF.
Well that happened as well supposedly. My only point is that the article doesn't even have basic fact checking. The North Hollywood Shootout did not last for hours.
The article itself is just typical liberal antigun BS, demonizing tools. If I was going to worry about something in American law enforcement it would be mindset and mission creep, not their equipment. Just read the article and note some of the hyperbole:
"In Montgomery County, Texas, the sheriff’s department owns a $300,000 pilotless surveillance drone, like those used to hunt down al Qaeda terrorists in the remote tribal regions of Pakistan and Afghanistan."
Yeah and Police helicopters are just like those used to gun down innocent women and children in Vietnam as seen in the movie Jull Metal Jacket!
"In Augusta, Maine, with fewer than 20,000 people and where an officer hasn’t died from gunfire in the line of duty in more than 125 years, police bought eight $1,500 tactical vests."
Well shit I guess nobody in that department wanted to be the first guy to do so, what a bunch of selfish assholes.
;)
From what I read, the local PD had to go buy rifles at a local gunshop which was later shut down by the BATF.
That is internet lore and simply not true...
Littlelebowski
12-21-11, 17:25
That is internet lore and simply not true...
Like I said, from what I read. So they didn't have to go a gunshop?
Like I said, from what I read. So they didn't have to go a gunshop?
The during the North Hollywood Shootout, news channels using scanners picked up an Officer talking on the radio who said (paraphrasing) "They've got machineguns, someone goto B&B and get some rifles."
B&B was a large Gunstore in the valley that sold a large selection of firearms including ARs, AKs, and bolt guns.
No firearms from B&B were used in the incident and all rounds fired were from on duty Police officers with City issued weapons...
B
Like I said, from what I read. So they didn't have to go a gunshop?
It is my understanding they commandeered the Colt Sporters from B&B Guns of North Hollywood.
The during the North Hollywood Shootout, news channels using scanners picked up an Officer talking on the radio who said (paraphrasing) "They've got machineguns, someone goto B&B and get some rifles."
B&B was a large Gunstore in the valley that sold a large selection of firearms including ARs, AKs, and bolt guns.
No firearms from B&B were used in the incident and all rounds fired were from on duty Police officers with City issued weapons...
BKind of funny how myths perpetuate.
I really fail to see the issue, it is not as though Cobras or arti is being used. Tools evolve for both sides, simple as that. Some are more useful than others but there is a larger need for some equipment and weapons than many realize. Having said that, I realize there is the increased chance for misuse as well.
variablebinary
12-21-11, 19:59
I really fail to see the issue, it is not as though Cobras or arti is being used. Tools evolve for both sides, simple as that. Some are more useful than others but there is a larger need for some equipment and weapons than many realize. Having said that, I realize there is the increased chance for misuse as well.
The problem is the holier than though attitude of politicians that want a powerful police force, but disarmed citizenry.
That is an absolute recipe for disaster on a long enough timeline.
It doesn't take much to take good cops and turn them into a gestapo. Just a couple of well placed political decisions and a threat of lost benefits and pay. It's even easier when the people have no means to defend themselves.
The during the North Hollywood Shootout, news channels using scanners picked up an Officer talking on the radio who said (paraphrasing) "They've got machineguns, someone goto B&B and get some rifles."
B&B was a large Gunstore in the valley that sold a large selection of firearms including ARs, AKs, and bolt guns.
No firearms from B&B were used in the incident and all rounds fired were from on duty Police officers with City issued weapons...
B
So they did go to B&B, but any guns got there were not used in the incident. Is that correct? (Maybe it was over before they got back?)
Thanks for clarifying
That article smacks of leftist anti gun bullshit.
Do some research and see how many active shooter incidents were in small towns. There are a great many which were only small blurbs in the news.
People can't stop talking about North Hollywood when the police were outgunned.
Given that weapons and equipment with an enhanced cabability are available, for little or no cost to departments, it would be a MUCH bigger story if police lacked the response necessary to address such threats.
It's the ostrich effect of suburbs. Bury your head in sand and hope it passes you by. Then sue the police department because they lacked the training and equipment to meet high threats and your loved ones died as a result.
The problem is the holier than though attitude of politicians that want a powerful police force, but disarmed citizenry.
That is an absolute recipe for disaster on a long enough timeline.
It doesn't take much to take good cops and turn them into a gestapo. Just a couple of well placed political decisions and a threat of lost benefits and pay. It's even easier when the people have no means to defend themselves.
I understand this, but you are addressing two different problems. If that is your concern then dont forget the ACTUAL military. Most cops are good guys
The during the North Hollywood Shootout, news channels using scanners picked up an Officer talking on the radio who said (paraphrasing) "They've got machineguns, someone goto B&B and get some rifles."
B&B was a large Gunstore in the valley that sold a large selection of firearms including ARs, AKs, and bolt guns.
No firearms from B&B were used in the incident and all rounds fired were from on duty Police officers with City issued weapons...
B
It's my understanding that they did acquire weapons at B&B, but SWAT officers arrived before the weapons were deployed.
Either way, I find it both incredibly amusing and disturbing to the point of straining credulity that an isolated incident that occurred 14 years ago is still being used as an excuse for podunk outfits in Pigs Snort, Nowhere, USA to arm up like they are preparing for a raid in Fallujah.
It's the ostrich effect of suburbs. Bury your head in sand and hope it passes you by. Then sue the police department because they lacked the training and equipment to meet high threats and your loved ones died as a result.
Umm.
I've always had a problem with the "training and equipment" argument. Beat cops armed with handguns and longguns and wearing body armor should be able to engage (and EXPECTED) to engage similarly equipped threats because almost without exception, the police have numbers on their side. Instead, we see events like VT and Columbine where dozens of armed men stand around the perimeter at a safe distance waiting for the shooting to stop (or SWAT/SRT to arrive). If police are incapable of acting without overwhelming firepower disparity, what ****ing good are they?
Police don't need more money and toys, they need more testicular fortitude.
variablebinary
12-21-11, 21:08
If police are incapable of acting without overwhelming firepower disparity, what ****ing good are they?
Someone has to pick up pieces of your skull and your dead wife after the fact.
When seconds count. Cops are minutes away...or hours...
Belmont31R
12-21-11, 21:18
That article smacks of leftist anti gun bullshit.
Do some research and see how many active shooter incidents were in small towns. There are a great many which were only small blurbs in the news.
People can't stop talking about North Hollywood when the police were outgunned.
Given that weapons and equipment with an enhanced cabability are available, for little or no cost to departments, it would be a MUCH bigger story if police lacked the response necessary to address such threats.
It's the ostrich effect of suburbs. Bury your head in sand and hope it passes you by. Then sue the police department because they lacked the training and equipment to meet high threats and your loved ones died as a result.
Im all for LEO's having the equipment they need to do their jobs but I should be able to get the same stuff, and with just as much ease.
One of the purposes of the 2nd was an average citizen being able to defend themselves from the government. Doesn't work very well when LEO's are allowed to have all kinds of 'toys' we aren't. I don't like the idea of the government having all these tools we can't defend against.
In the early part of our country people owned ships of war, cannon, mortar, and could buy any long arm they wanted. A mortar back then was no joke and puts aside the argument of the "modern military guns didn't exist back then".
Littlelebowski
12-21-11, 21:21
It's my understanding that they did acquire weapons at B&B, but SWAT officers arrived before the weapons were deployed.
Either way, I find it both incredibly amusing and disturbing to the point of straining credulity that an isolated incident that occurred 14 years ago is still being used as an excuse for podunk outfits in Pigs Snort, Nowhere, USA to arm up like they are preparing for a raid in Fallujah.
They usually do so for raids on non violent drug users. The dogs usually suffer. SWAT is struggling to justify their sometimes extra pay and training by acting like "operators."
The last Defoor class I was at, there was a cop there clad head to toe in multicam bragging about killing dogs. We need a paradigm shift in our militarization of the police and the best way to start is by legalizing marijuana. I don't blame the cops so much as our retarded "war" in drugs that kills innocents every day. Most of the cops I hang out with deplore what's become of SWAT teams and the drug war in general.
The real villains are prosecutors in my book.
Regrettably the amount of bad cops on patrol is likely higher than even I would be willing to estimate on a bad day. Like littlebowskie alluded to, we are seeing a massive waste of resources that has no benefit to public safety and untold detriment to the image of law enforcement. The legal system needs to be gutted and retasked with nailing people who commit crimes with actual victims. Under current laws, everybody is merely an unprosecuted strict-liability offender.
You'd have more good guys sign up and roided-out meathead powertrippers resign if the Ben Franklin gold standard for government involvement in other peoples affairs was physical or financial malfeasance towards their fellow man. 4th Amendment rights should be strongly reaffirmed. Juries should be selected at random and told they are judging the constitutionality of the law, as well as the crime. A lot of people complain of cops having an us-vs-them occupation mentality. Patrols and paramilitary uniforms are not helpful in this regard. If Police responded only to real crimes around here, you could dispatch them same as firemen, with much less frequency. The speeding ticket business would undoubtedly suffer, but I've never gotten a speeding ticket, so I'm a bad customer to the state in this regard.
There are a lot of entrenched interests propping up the current system.
Instead, we see events like VT and Columbine where dozens of armed men stand around the perimeter at a safe distance waiting for the shooting to stop (or SWAT/SRT to arrive). If police are incapable of acting without overwhelming firepower disparity, what ****ing good are they?
Police don't need more money and toys, they need more testicular fortitude.
Policy and doctrine USED TO dictate establishing a perimeter and waiting for the SWAT team. That is no longer the case. It was never a question of "testicular fortitude" (how Foley-esque.) Suggesting that police officers lack courage because they did what they were trained to do is ignorant.
It will be used for the "war" on drugs.
Or to make an accurate head shot on an active shooter inside of a grammar school.
VooDoo6Actual
12-21-11, 23:18
Correct, guns WERE loaned/handed out to LAPD at B&B just the ones handed out were not engaged.
Correct LAPD SWAT Team members did respond & did neutralize the threats.
Belmont31R
12-21-11, 23:26
Or to make an accurate head shot on an active shooter inside of a grammar school.
The issue with this, and having all the equipment is that it has to be justified so they use it on things like non violent pot dealers.
I forget which show, exactly, as its been a couple years, but it was one of the "SWAT" shows in discovery or similar. They took a armored vehicle with the boom on the front and demolished half the front of this dudes house to gain entry because he was selling pot.
It takes quite a bit of training and equipment + personnel to have a competant swat team, and active shooter situations are pretty rare in this country. Its a term that gets thrown around a lot and is basically a buzzword now. Anyways if you train a group of people and equip them what do they do the other 1000 days they are not facing such a situation? Suddenly you get swat raids all the time for everything under the sun.
Such as this guy who had SWAT show up at his house because a police helicopter spotted a pot plant on his property. http://www.nbc29.com/story/15720475/rutherford-institute-represents-cobbs-on-pot-charge
This is basically a double edged sword where you have these guys who are trained to a certain standard and are more tactically proficient than your average beat cop but they can't sit around for years waiting for an "active shooter" situation. Instead politicians and civic leaders find ways to use them like swarming a dudes property because a helo spotted a plant.
Again Im not against LEO's having the tools they need to do the job but we need to be mindful of how these people are employed and how we justify their use. I am certainly against the government flying aviation units looking for things on people's property. If you have 40 acres and are in the middle of it I think you certainly have the reasonable expectation of privacy. Its gotten to point we have some municipalities using google maps to spot code violations in peoples back yards and such.
Such as this guy who had SWAT show up at his house because a police helicopter spotted a pot plant on his property. http://www.nbc29.com/story/15720475/rutherford-institute-represents-cobbs-on-pot-charge
That's just dumb.
Umm.
I've always had a problem with the "training and equipment" argument. Beat cops armed with handguns and longguns and wearing body armor should be able to engage (and EXPECTED) to engage similarly equipped threats because almost without exception, the police have numbers on their side. Instead, we see events like VT and Columbine where dozens of armed men stand around the perimeter at a safe distance waiting for the shooting to stop (or SWAT/SRT to arrive). If police are incapable of acting without overwhelming firepower disparity, what ****ing good are they?
Police don't need more money and toys, they need more testicular fortitude.
That was a doctrine problem. Before active shooter was a buzz word, that was standard practice, to contain then engage. Lessons taken from that incident in particular have completely reshaped the response.
As to testicles, I take it you put on a uniform and took some radio calls, made some arrests etc and are speaking from experience. Otherwise it's like you're just running off at the mouth about something you know nothing about.
As to Belmonts post, many departments direct that SWAT execute all search warrants. Purely the result of civil litigation when departments don't use those resources and things go sideways.
Moose-Knuckle
12-22-11, 01:26
IMHO further evidence of the American Police State.
After the NDAA was just passed the last thing I want to see in Holder's DOJ arsenal is .mil hardware.
FromMyColdDeadHand
12-22-11, 01:50
Do some research and see how many active shooter incidents were in small towns. There are a great many which were only small blurbs in the news.
It's the ostrich effect of suburbs. Bury your head in sand and hope it passes you by. Then sue the police department because they lacked the training and equipment to meet high threats and your loved ones died as a result.
Actually, if you want to stop active shooters, its way better to have as widespread CCW program (with out silly location restictions) that some SWAT team, or even beat cops with rifles.
Patrols and paramilitary uniforms are not helpful in this regard. If Police responded only to real crimes around here, you could dispatch them same as firemen, with much less frequency. The speeding ticket business would undoubtedly suffer, but I've never gotten a speeding ticket, so I'm a bad customer to the state in this regard.
There are a lot of entrenched interests propping up the current system.
Why have Posse Comitatus if you just shift all the weapons and gear from the military to the police? A drone flying, APC driving, operator minded police force is just as caustic as having the military driving around town.
As to entrenched interests, someone asked why they just don't use bomb sniffing dogs at airports instead of billions of dollars for scanners. A smart-ass chimed in that dogs don't have million dollar lobbyist on capital hill.
The issue with this, and having all the equipment is that it has to be justified so they use it on things like non violent pot dealers.
I forget which show, exactly, as its been a couple years, but it was one of the "SWAT" shows in discovery or similar. They took a armored vehicle with the boom on the front and demolished half the front of this dudes house to gain entry because he was selling pot.
This is basically a double edged sword where you have these guys who are trained to a certain standard and are more tactically proficient than your average beat cop but they can't sit around for years waiting for an "active shooter" situation. Instead politicians and civic leaders find ways to use them like swarming a dudes property because a helo spotted a plant.
If you have a square peg, you start shoving it in every hole, and then start making holes to put the peg in.
Mauser KAR98K
12-22-11, 02:10
Maybe, and hopefully with the next administrations--hopefully--we can update Posse Comitatus. It needs it bad, IMO. I grew up in a very big law enforcement home and family, and my relatives are saying the militarization of Law Enforcement has made it to where the public are not your neighbors anymore, but citizens/subjects. I try to deny it, but it is true.
is current society to blame? A good portion of it, yes. The lack of personal responsibility and expecting the police to be there at a moments notice has turned Law Enforcement into a fast-food service. Call done, report done, next call, move on. In the local cities, and where I live, I don't see it as much, but it is creeping in.
I agree about the CCW's, and there needing more of them, plus without the silly imaginary line restrictions. In fact, since firearm sales are up, alone with CCW, crime rate is down...expect for assualts on LEO's. Those are up dynamically.
As to testicles, I take it you put on a uniform and took some radio calls, made some arrests etc and are speaking from experience. Otherwise it's like you're just running off at the mouth about something you know nothing about.
I'm going to bow out of this discussion because citizens are held to a higher posting standard than police are on this board, but I'm going to leave you with this: I donned a uniform and served in a warzone, not a suburb.
SWATcop556
12-22-11, 02:45
I'm going to bow out of this discussion because citizens are held to a higher posting standard than police are on this board
If people can argue their points without things spiraling into an "all cops are crooks with badges" or "you're an uninformed idiot because what we are doing if for your own good" then discussion is encouraged. We have tried allow the LE topics back into GD and so far things have been handled well and professionally so I would say your statement is inaccurate at best.
I'm going to bow out of this discussion because citizens are held to a higher posting standard than police are on this board, but I'm going to leave you with this: I donned a uniform and served in a warzone, not a suburb.
Too bad the whole country isn't a suburb.
The irony is without having preformed your particular MOS in whatever branch you claimed to have served in, I wouldn't comment on what it would take to do that job or how it should be done. Let alone make a pissy little swipe about having balls to do so.
Nor would I do the same for a doctor, car mechanic, or the guy who lays floor tile. So until you actually have experience doing something, maybe you should keep it to yourself.
I'm sure I'm way off on this, putting these two concepts together, but the first thing that came to mind was Obama's quote stating that he was going to develop a civil force as well equipped and trained as the Military.
The real villains are prosecutors in my book.
All to often that is the case.
arizonaranchman
12-22-11, 07:45
Regrettably the amount of bad cops on patrol is likely higher than even I would be willing to estimate on a bad day. Like littlebowskie alluded to, we are seeing a massive waste of resources that has no benefit to public safety and untold detriment to the image of law enforcement. The legal system needs to be gutted and retasked with nailing people who commit crimes with actual victims. Under current laws, everybody is merely an unprosecuted strict-liability offender.
You'd have more good guys sign up and roided-out meathead powertrippers resign if the Ben Franklin gold standard for government involvement in other peoples affairs was physical or financial malfeasance towards their fellow man. 4th Amendment rights should be strongly reaffirmed. Juries should be selected at random and told they are judging the constitutionality of the law, as well as the crime. A lot of people complain of cops having an us-vs-them occupation mentality. Patrols and paramilitary uniforms are not helpful in this regard. If Police responded only to real crimes around here, you could dispatch them same as firemen, with much less frequency. The speeding ticket business would undoubtedly suffer, but I've never gotten a speeding ticket, so I'm a bad customer to the state in this regard.
There are a lot of entrenched interests propping up the current system.
Amen! Well said...
The Us vs Them mentality of the government is alarming. When the government, which exists to protect We the People, secure our borders and preserve our Rights, actually sees the public as a threat, that tells us something is grossly out of line. This Defender has increasingly evolved into our Master.
As to our topic on this thread...
Yes the police are EXPECTED to be able to deal with a whacko who's out shooting up the town, so appropriate weapons and tools to accomplish this are necessary. SWAT teams generally take about an HOUR to assemble and arrive at a scene. In 99% of rampages this is way too late and the damage is done. The beat cop on the street engages in 95+% of gunfights that law enforcement gets into, it's over and done with in seconds or minutes, long before any SWAT team can ever be of any good. The vast majority of what SWAT teams do is door-kicking on warrant service. The beat cop on the street who gets there while the smoke is still in the air is who has to be well armed and trained to deal with whatever comes his way.
Wow, I thought this place was different from bARF.com.....guess not.
Lots of LEO hate in this thread.
Just a Jarhead
12-22-11, 14:09
Wow, I thought this place was different from bARF.com.....guess not.
Lots of LEO hate in this thread.
I don't think it's LEO hate as much as it is a intense distrust & disdain of our goverment these days and unfortunately LEO is the enforcement side of the goverment.
I absoultely agree with Belmont's sentiments below.
Im all for LEO's having the equipment they need to do their jobs but I should be able to get the same stuff, and with just as much ease.
One of the purposes of the 2nd was an average citizen being able to defend themselves from the government. Doesn't work very well when LEO's are allowed to have all kinds of 'toys' we aren't. I don't like the idea of the government having all these tools we can't defend against.
I know I would feel much better about the miltarization of police if this were the case. 2nd ammendment wasn't about hunting rights and we all know that. It was to protect from a goverment run amuck. It makes many of us, myself included, very uncomfortable watching our ability to fight back less effective godforbid if it ever became necessary one day. Especially as our nation is becoming increasingly more and more severely polarized. Just not very comforting. Who knows what lays ahead for us.
The during the North Hollywood Shootout, news channels using scanners picked up an Officer talking on the radio who said (paraphrasing) "They've got machineguns, someone goto B&B and get some rifles."
B&B was a large Gunstore in the valley that sold a large selection of firearms including ARs, AKs, and bolt guns.
No firearms from B&B were used in the incident and all rounds fired were from on duty Police officers with City issued weapons...
B
Doesn't really matter if they were used or not. It seems that did in fact go get guns from the gun store and the store was later shut down by ATF (not suggesting the incidents are in any way related).
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_16164852
Armed only with their shotguns and 9 mm handguns, the officers went to a nearby gun shop, where employees broke out shotguns and rifles and more powerful ammunition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout
Since the police handguns could not penetrate the bank robbers' body armor, the patrol officers' efforts were ineffective. SWAT eventually arrived with weapons that could penetrate and several officers also appropriated AR-15 rifles from a nearby firearms dealer. The incident sparked debate on the appropriate firepower for patrol officers to have available in similar situations in the future.
Unless you are saying the above accounts are simply not true either. But it isn't just a internet rumor.
Someone has to pick up pieces of your skull and your dead wife after the fact.
When seconds count. Cops are minutes away...or hours...
Damn dude. That ain't exactly fair.
I agree that cops are generally reactive, but that is because it is hard to prevent most crime. I also agree that many, many times things happen that prevent the police from being as responsive or efficient as they could be.
But who else is coming? Who else is even gonna try and go in to save your ass? And a LOT of cops do a pretty good job at saving people.
They ain't perfect and that is why most of us try and be ready to take care of ourselves, but I think you are being way too dismissive.
Originally Posted by Belmont31R
Im all for LEO's having the equipment they need to do their jobs but I should be able to get the same stuff, and with just as much ease.
One of the purposes of the 2nd was an average citizen being able to defend themselves from the government. Doesn't work very well when LEO's are allowed to have all kinds of 'toys' we aren't. I don't like the idea of the government having all these tools we can't defend against.
Like what?
I think at one point a F-18, aircraft carrier, and a tank were all on E-Bay. In most cities there is one police officer for every 10,000 people. So what is this big capability you think police departments have?
The National Guard has a greater capability and much more powerful weapons than any police department. So who do you think in an example of that kind of severe civil unrest (to the point of being a civil war) do you think you'd be facing?
Originally Posted by armakraut
Under current laws, everybody is merely an unprosecuted strict-liability offender.
What does this mean?
So what is this big capability you think police departments have?
I saw the Unified Police Department (Salt Lake Valley sheriffs dept police force) driving their M113 down the road a few months ago for a public display at a police/fire public day.
I am not really sure why they need an APC to police all the unincorporated and small cities in Salt Lake Valley (who don't have all their own departments).
Some police departments have belt feds (I've seen pictures, but not in person). What does a police department need a belt fed for?
I support the use of patrol rifles and stuff -- same stuff we all have.
Patrick Aherne
12-22-11, 17:51
I used an armored vehicle to rescue two children from a rampaging home invader, who killed their mother in the midst of the rescue. I often wonder if I had a Rook or just a Bearcat with the turret hatch, if we could have saved her, too. There were other problems with the rescue, but equipment would have helped, I am sure.
I'll hold my tongue and follow my own Internet rule: if I wouldn't say it sitting next to a guy in the next barstool, I probably shouldn't say it.
What does this mean?
It means that there are so many "felonies" on the books that you probably commit dozens every day. You just aren't being prosecuted for them. Strict liability statutes dictate that you are guilty, even if you had no knowledge of the law, or intent to break the law (mens rea).
Felony used to mean a crime that could carry the death penalty, IE a real crime, as opposed to some chickenshit bolshevik suckfest law that aims to turn you into a taxpaying non-voting, non-arms-bearing, drone.
I've seen way more machine guns in private hands than owned by police departments. Go to Knob Creek sometime.
The capability people think police departments have vs what they actually have is pretty far disconnected from reality.
The application of armored vehicles is extremely limited. But when you need one, you REALLY need one. Its not like there is a TOW missile launcher and a 20mm cannon mounted on it. The vast majority are doctored up armored trucks you could see Wells Fargo driving. As expensive as those trucks are, decommissioned or partially decommissioned military vehicles are a cost savings over other platforms. To a degree it's a have and not need vs a want and not have situation.
Just about every policy and procedure in a department is the result of a prior incident or civil litigation. It's sad that it's as reactive as it is, but that's the world we live in.
If you think police here are heavy handed see how Russia handles a hostage situation.
It means that there are so many "felonies" on the books that you probably commit dozens every day. You just aren't being prosecuted for them. Strict liability statutes dictate that you are guilty, even if you had no knowledge of the law, or intent to break the law (mens rea).
Felony used to mean a crime that could carry the death penalty, IE a real crime, as opposed to some chickenshit bolshevik suckfest law that aims to turn you into a taxpaying non-voting, non-arms-bearing, drone.
What is an example of a felony criminal violation most people commit everyday?
When did felony mean death penalty?
The only thing that seperates misdemeanor crimes from felonies are the term of imprisonment which is authorized. Not actually applied, but authorized by statute.
It doesn't take much to take good cops and turn them into a gestapo. Just a couple of well placed political decisions and a threat of lost benefits and pay. .
And that's coming from a member of the mil community, who often get stereotyped as baby killing monsters? I'd think you would be above a comment like that. The LEOs I know are solid people, and I'll take their company, and watching of my back, over most civi's any day.
I have seen a couple versions of this story as well as a couple stories about California LE buying guns that are banned for everyone else (Stupid CA AW ban) in the news this past week. It seems awful suspicious to have related stories coming out around the same time on different prongs? I'm worried less about the cops/civilians argument than this being a test probe towards more gun control in general. Seems like if they can form an argument for cops not having certain weapons then it's another way to argue that nobody should have them... Well except the Feds ;)
Belmont31R
12-22-11, 18:22
Like what?
I think at one point a F-18, aircraft carrier, and a tank were all on E-Bay. In most cities there is one police officer for every 10,000 people. So what is this big capability you think police departments have?
The National Guard has a greater capability and much more powerful weapons than any police department. So who do you think in an example of that kind of severe civil unrest (to the point of being a civil war) do you think you'd be facing?
What does this mean?
LE has access to weapons and explosives that I do not, and have the budget to purchase things like tracked vehicles, heavy wheeled vehicles, UAV's, ect.
In my city, we have around 50k people, and just under 90 sworn LE not counting county sheriff dept, and DPS. In fact two motorcycle officers drove down my street today and I waved as they went by. Got a wave back. They keep speeders out of the neighborhood and we had a motorcycle officer die last year on duty. I donated to the fund they setup for his family and would do the same for any other local officer who dies doing their job (correctly).
Seems some people are overly sensitive to critique of government and take things personally since they may be an LEO or other government employee. I know Irish and I have talked about this privately, and we are certainly not anti LEO we just want to be treated the same, and don't want a government restricting us while equipping LE with some impressive stuff. Thats taking away the check and balance the American people hold against their governments. Government is for the people by the people.
The Federal government has checks and balances built into itself, and then there is the people who are the ultimate check and balance. Government is by the public's leisure not the other way around.
Here is a recent example of government getting something I cannot, at least under the same laws, procedures, and cost.
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/texas/new-dps-boats-tools-in-drug-smuggling
LEO's in CA need their departments permission before buying that stuff. More common in rural areas where even a regular joe can get a CCW, not so much in the cities or the suburbs.
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/texas/new-dps-boats-tools-in-drug-smuggling
$3.5 million for 6 boats is a lot of money, taxpayer money that is.
Belmont31R
12-22-11, 19:45
$3.5 million for 6 boats is a lot of money, taxpayer money that is.
The vessels sport 4 machine gun turrets and state of the art night vision cameras.
They are pintle mounts for M240's...
That is internet lore and simply not true...
It's also a deleted scene from the movie remake of S.W.A.T. with Samuel L Jackson.
LE has access to weapons and explosives that I do not, and have the budget to purchase things like tracked vehicles, heavy wheeled vehicles, UAV's, ect.
So the argument is because you can't afford a UAV or an armored vehicle police departments shouldn't be able to use them?
It's not that it's anti-LE and/or government, it's thats some of these discussion points wildly ignore logic, and some of the posters seem to have very little understanding, having zero experience and less technical knowledge.
Would someone in the technical section of this forum, who does not own a rifle, have training or even shoot, but bases their opionion on articles which amount to a thinly veiled editorial, be tolerated?
Or would everyone jump his shit and tell him to buy a BCM and take a class? ;)
So the argument is because you can't afford a UAV or an armored vehicle police departments shouldn't be able to use them?
It is not the afford part.
Assuming you have the cash, please tell me where I can get an APC or other modern (non antique) armored vehicle with modern weaponry?
Please tell me where I can order an armored speedboat boat with 4 pintle mounted M240s, state of the art IR laser and top of the line mil-grade NV on it? Assuming I have the cash to pay for it...
http://www.armyjeeps.net/armor1.htm
I googled "APC for sale" and that's the first link that came up. You can buy a M113 for $137,500...and it has night vision.
I've never seen functional weaponary you would see on a .mil APC on a police one.
At the gym today I saw an episode of Sons of Guns were they we're building a custom M240 helicopter mount for a private buyer. The stuff is out there apparently.
http://www.armyjeeps.net/armor1.htm
I googled "APC for sale" and that's the first link that came up. You can buy a M113 for $137,500...and it has night vision.
Not the modern mil-spec night vision with mil-spec IR lasers, and withweaponry
I know you can buy some older surplus (M113 is an older APC) stuff. With old technology NV.
Show me where I can buy a current issue APC with weaponry and issue night vision.
Belmont31R
12-22-11, 23:58
So the argument is because you can't afford a UAV or an armored vehicle police departments shouldn't be able to use them?
It's not that it's anti-LE and/or government, it's thats some of these discussion points wildly ignore logic, and some of the posters seem to have very little understanding, having zero experience and less technical knowledge.
Would someone in the technical section of this forum, who does not own a rifle, have training or even shoot, but bases their opionion on articles which amount to a thinly veiled editorial, be tolerated?
Or would everyone jump his shit and tell him to buy a BCM and take a class? ;)
LE can buy post 86 machine guns at manf cost which I cannot, and there are very few "modern" MG's that are pre 86. The DPS cost to outfit 4 boats with 4 M240's would cost about the same as it would for me to get a "modern" belt fed since they don't pay wildly inflated prices like I would nor are they buying old used guns. I was born in 83 and the registry was closed in 86. That means, except for 3 years, any MG I buy will be as old or older than I am. Yeah its the same thing as LE getting modern equipment..:(
I cannot buy from a manufacture a modern IR laser like a PEQ15. They are all black market items or 2nd hand. If it breaks I cant get it fixed.
Not the modern mil-spec night vision with mil-spec IR lasers, and withweaponry
I know you can buy some older surplus (M113 is an older APC) stuff. With old technology NV.
Show me where I can buy a current issue APC with weaponry and issue night vision.
Show me a police department that has the same, equipped as you said complete with the weapons it came with as provided to the military.
Lacking the legal research on such matters, I would speculate buying current military hardware as you listed would have all kind of laws attached, none pertaining to police departments.
I listed the M113 because it was the model which went to a department.
The we can't have it, so they shouldn't have it logic defies all reason. No one in this thread has clearly articulated a reason why they would need it, other than to say the police do.
At some point, probably several posts ago, we're talking circles.
Show me a police department that has the same, equipped as you said complete with the weapons it came with as provided to the military.
Lacking the legal research on such matters, I would speculate buying current military hardware as you listed would have all kind of laws attached, none pertaining to police departments.
I listed the M113 because it was the model which went to a department.
I have no problem with the M113 example if it can have the same weapons, same NV, etc. The M113 you showed me does not fall into that category.
Belmont gave an example of an armored boat bought by a LEA with modern weapons.
The we can't have it, so they shouldn't have it logic defies all reason. No one in this thread has clearly articulated a reason why they would need it, other than to say the police do.
Actually, you have it exactly backwards. It has nothing to do with need because the police have it.
The issue is that the police should not have stuff that the citizens can't have when it comes to the weapons and equipment. That is called a police state.
The logic of the police should be able to have whatever they want but the citizens have to be strictly controlled defies all reason as well in a free country like America used to be.
(And most police departments can't show a real need for belt feds, APCs, etc either [which does not disallow the fact that they might be useful in blue moon situations])
At some point, probably several posts ago, we're talking circles.
Belmont31R
12-23-11, 02:49
So the argument is because you can't afford a UAV or an armored vehicle police departments shouldn't be able to use them?
It's not that it's anti-LE and/or government, it's thats some of these discussion points wildly ignore logic, and some of the posters seem to have very little understanding, having zero experience and less technical knowledge.
Would someone in the technical section of this forum, who does not own a rifle, have training or even shoot, but bases their opionion on articles which amount to a thinly veiled editorial, be tolerated?
Or would everyone jump his shit and tell him to buy a BCM and take a class? ;)
I am sure the gov can afford whatever they want based on the current tax rates.
The argument I cant afford it so others should not is hagwash. I bet I could afford a 900HP boat if I were collecting 8% sales tax and and 3k per average home. I am sure the brits could have afforded the war effort if they got the same type of tax base.
The issue is that the police should not have stuff that the citizens can't have when it comes to the weapons and equipment. That is called a police state.
And that's exactly where we disagree. It seems a little "tin foil hat" to me.
I believe if you actually had a working understanding of how domestic police forces function, your view would be much different.
Maybe you should fill out an application and give it a try.
And that's exactly where we disagree. It seems a little "tin foil hat" to me.
What does freedom have to do with "tin foil hat"?
I believe if you actually had a working understanding of how domestic police forces function, your view would be much different.
Go ahead and explain it.
Maybe you should fill out an application and give it a try.
No, go ahead and explain it.
(I have several friends on various local departments and a friend who is an ICE agent)
Please explain how knowing this would make me feel different about police having access to weapons the citizens don't have in a free country.
You just want all the answers spoon fed to you.
I could waste hours of my life typing out the day to day realities of police work, but its not going to change your view. Its like arguing about religion. Do your own work man.
Your comment about having friends in LE sounds like when someone tells a racist joke and says they have a black friend. Go talk to your friends and tell them your view of how this is a police state.
Again, this is nothing but a big circular discussion at this point. I've seen more powerful guns in the hands of citizens than police departments by a large margin, but you want to live in this fantasy world where you think you live in a police state.
If you're going shiny side out with the foil don't stand in the sun too long. ;)
You just want all the answers spoon fed to you.
No, I want answers from you to back up your claims.
This has nothing to do with being spoon fed. This is not something a Google search will find.
see: http://www.google.com/#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=why+does+bp7178+feel+that+police+departments+should+have+weapons+that+law-abiding+civilians+cannot+have%3F&pbx=1&oq=why+does+bp7178+feel+that+police+departments+should+have+weapons+that+law-abiding+civilians+cannot+have%3F&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1276l22473l0l22861l108l76l0l2l2l0l499l13950l0.49.25.0.1l78l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=ffcff2763d276d22&biw=1627&bih=1363
I could waste hours of my life typing out the day to day realities of police work, but its not going to change your view. Its like arguing about religion. Do your own work man.
Your comment about having friends in LE sounds like when someone tells a racist joke and says they have a black friend. Go talk to your friends and tell them your view of how this is a police state.
Again, this is nothing but a big circular discussion at this point. I've seen more powerful guns in the hands of citizens than police departments by a large margin, but you want to live in this fantasy world where you think you live in a police state.
If you're going shiny side out with the foil don't stand in the sun too long. ;)
Fine. I guess you are full of hot air. You cannot articulate it and push it off on me to figure it out.
I have asked a simple question which you refuse to answer, and instead bluster on.
Once more: Why should police have weapons and equipment unavailable to law abiding civilians?
Please answer the question. Me thinks, you cannot provide reasonable answers to this or else you would have.
This has nothing to do with "tin foil hat." If you think it does, then you obviously don't even know what the issue and question is.
Once more: Why should police have weapons and equipment unavailable to law abiding civilians?
This has been addressed many times over in this thread, both by me and others.
This has been addressed many times over in this thread, both by me and others.
Really? I just read the whole thread. I did not see it addressed once. I only saw it avoided by you.
There were a few examples where such weapons were useful to police (APC type vehicle to rescue someone).
That does not answer the question at all:
Why should police have weapons and equipment unavailable to law abiding civilians?
Please, just answer the question. If you can, without getting into "tinfoil hat stuff."
And for the record, I am not against police having the weapons and equipment necessary to do their normal job.
But I am also not against allowing civilians to have the same stuff. If you prohibit civilians from having it, and allow police to have it, you have a police state. That is not what the founding fathers had in mind.
Littlelebowski
12-23-11, 07:12
The problem with military style tactics and weapons for police is that mission creep dictates they will inevitably be used against citizens for purposes outside of the original justification. SWAT used to be for hostage standoffs, bank robberies, and whatnot. Now SWAT teams raid poker games, serve warrants for non violent offense, and so on. Drones are now trickling into police hands. The days of the beat cop who knows his community inside and out are giving rise to the tactical cop with technology.
NCPatrolAR
12-23-11, 08:11
enough of the bickering and beating a dead horse
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.