i remember back in the 80's when Elmira stood up it's SWAT team and on their first outing had a Blue on Blue killing... the mutt what fired the shot became Officer Friendly in one of their schools till he retired
Posted on 08/28/2013 3:02:44 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
We need police to catch murderers, thieves and con men, and so we give them special power — the power to use force on others. Sadly, today’s police use that power to invade people’s homes over accusations of trivial, nonviolent offenses — and often do it with tanks, battering rams and armor you’d expect on battlefields.
In his book “Rise of the Warrior Cop,” Radley Balko recounts the rise of police SWAT teams (SWAT stands for Special Weapons And Tactics) armed with heavy military equipment. SWAT raids began as rarely used methods of dealing with violent situations, like hostage-takings.
But government always grows.
In the 1970s, there were about 300 SWAT raids per year. “As of 2005,” says Balko, “100 to 150 per day.”
What began as a few specialized groups of police trained to address genuine threats to safety has degenerated into small armies descending on organic farms where farmers sell unpasteurized milk and legal medical marijuana dispensaries getting raided as if they were heavily armed threats.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
It is absurd to be sending SWAT teams to be raiding organic farms or even suspected small-time pot smokers. Innocent people have been killed needlessly. They should only be used in highly dangerous situaitons pursuing heavily armed suspects.
The cops are militarized, and the military are supposed to act as police.
It’s topsy turvy no doubt.
Local yokel departments are buying up APCs that are nothign more than expensive toys and attempting to claim that ‘they will save lives.’ The idiot local papers never think to ask what the police have been doing to date that would allow such dangerous people, situations and weaponry to become established in the first place.
i remember back in the 80's when Elmira stood up it's SWAT team and on their first outing had a Blue on Blue killing... the mutt what fired the shot became Officer Friendly in one of their schools till he retired
Anyone stop to think that the purchase of “heavier” equipment is a response to the ready availability of heavier weapons by the bad guys? I have seen ignorant posts on FR about police should not need anything other than a shot gun or pistol. I would ask that person to cover open ground being shot at by motivated person with a rifle that can reach out and touch you at several hundred yards. How effective will you be with a sidearm at 100 yards? 50? If you had to cover distance to get to a school shooter, since waiting for SWAT is no longer an option, you might be thankful for an APC or rifle that can get you to an entry point so you can actually be of use, and not a statistic. I agree, the deployment of these SWAT teams is boneheaded at times, but would rather have them and not need them, than the flip side...my 2 cents
Is heavier equipment really more available than it used to be? The 30-06 dates from 1906, and it will do a dandy job at any range a non-expert shooter is likely to hit his target at.
Rapid-firing weapons, the horrible "assault weapons" are indeed more readily available than they used to be, but they aren't "heavier." They're actually lighter than many hunting rifles.
You said it at the end, “rather have them and not need them”. But therein lies the problem.
The evidence is stacking up against them. Their overuse is ridiculous. Look at some of them. They were the US Army Multicam uniform. A uniform designed for soldiers serving in Afghanistan. Its not even authorized to be worn anywhere else, other than Afghanistan. But what did we all see during the events in Boston. Hundreds of them, patrolling Boston in Multicam so they can be like the guy in a Call of Duty video game. Its gotten totally out of hand.
The best way to address the vast majority of paramilitary police problems is at the state level. State legislatures should actively cool down these overheated police departments.
1) Create a designated list of authorized police equipment in the state. Any additional equipment that police departments have must be given to the appropriate county Sheriff for inventory control in his equipment storage area, unless specifically approved for that police department by the state attorney general for special use; in particular rescue equipment. Privately owned equipment used by on duty officers must likewise be approved.
2) All situations in which police brandish weapons in non-training situations in the performance of their duties will be legally considered authorized assault that may result in the lethal use of force. Therefore, the use of other, less lethal weapons is preferred in most situations.
3) The criminal homicide of a law enforcement officer in the line of duty in the state, with or without aggravating circumstances is eligible for a sentence of death.
For every Joe Friday style great cop there is a grownup school bully who enjoys being a jackboot thug cause it’s makes him feel important, and other one who for whom it’s a just a decent job that he treats with no more care than if he worked at the post office.
Cops are people. People suck.
I’m with ya. But the body cam isn’t any different than the dashcam. The dashcam is/was instrumental in keeping a lot of cops out of trouble when the drunk or whoever makes complaints.
When I was in local law enforcement, our DUI cars were the only ones with them.
Just a sign of the times. More technology. More accountability. And more importantly, more deniability on the part of the dept’s and governments to be able to throw a cop under the bus for failing to follow an SOP.
But at the end of the day, these units(while definitely needed) are way overused. And they get too amped up on this “officer safety - so I can do what I want as long as I go home” stuff. If someone needs a punch in the face, than by all means do it. But when you hear of them hitting the wrong doors, killing innocents at the wrong location, that’s just not good.
If no, then would you enforce such anti-gun laws against an otherwise law-abiding citizen?
The main problem people have is not the weaponry. The main issue is the overuse of SWAT. Sending a SWAT team to do a dynamic entry at a poker game in someone’s house is not only improper use of resources but tacitly dangerous as well. There are many cases that advocate use of SWAT, but the ones you read on FR that rant against overt police brutality at not exactly raids at a well-armed and violent criminal cell. SWAT should be used when special weapons and tactics are required, not just because they are an available option that can be used. That’s the problem (most) FReepers have with police.
I was opposed to all this arming of smaller cities and town police forces with more advanced weaponry.
I’m having second thoughts.
Yes, they will cause a lot of deaths, but for those of us who need and want real firepower, the physically closer to us that it is stored, the easier it will be to obtain.
These faux LEO’s will be just doing their job, while we will be fighting for our families, our homes, and our children’s future.
Not only will we be more determined, we are a lot smarter than the average LEO.
I know who’s side I’m betting on.
I’m just an older guy, so I probably won’t get all the way to the goods, just you guys don’t let my death be in vain.
Not being allowed does not translate to not having access. Nowhere is it written that the police have to play catch up with the weapons on the market now. Another thing to consider, however unlikely, is the possibility of a terrorist event in a small jurisdiction. Bow ma y people can be killed by motivated shitheads while waiting for the state police swat team gets called in, briefs, then responds?
If the answer is "no", then would you enforce such anti-gun laws against an otherwise law-abiding citizen? (yes or no)
Too many ‘no knock raids’.
I do believe that AR15s are available to the public...ballistic vests...yep...APCs...not sure. If there is a law against owning a certain weapon, and someone has one, then they are no longer an otherwise law abiding citizen. I have seen many posts with the same logic regarding illegal aliens...they are breaking the law, but are otherwise law abiding citizens.
So if your municipality were to adopt Chicago-style gun laws, you apparently would not consider a citizen who owned a handgun as law-abiding, and would arrest him. Is that correct?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.